[CONGRESSIONAL RECORD] THE CUBAN BASE OF RUSSIAN OPERATIONS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 14
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 27, 2004
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: September 20, 1962
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Relea
'1962
e 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE 19089
ister the laws impartially and to apply
them uniformly.
The tendency to legislate or to admin-
ister our laws, for the purpose of get-
ting any one man is a dangerous one; one
that threatens tale very foundations of
law by "due process"?by which the
rights of the individual are protected by
procedural safeguards.
When government looks the other way
and permits a trampling of those rights,
we have government by prejudice, by
headlines and by political expediency.
The facts discussed on the floor yes-
terday portray an all-powerful govern-
ment dragging a citizen away from his
home to a hostile jurisdiction for the
purpose of "getting him."
Mr. Speaker, in this regard I submit
an editorial below from the Knoxville,
Tenn., Journal of August 23, 1962. The
editorial follows:
THOSE OVERWOHEP UNIONS
The Justice Department has announced
that a grand jury in Chicago will make an
Investigation of the $180 million Central
States Pension Fund of the Teamsters Union.
The obvious expectation on the part of the
Department is to get at James R. Hoffa, who
has been a target of the Kennedy adminis-
tration. Criminal charges against the
Teamster head will be tried in Federal court
at Nashville in (Sctober. Subsequently an-
other criminal actlon is planned against the
union leader in Miami where he and a Detroit
bank official are charged with fraud.
It is apparent that the Justice Depart-
ment has been working intensively at its
self-chosen task of sending Hoffa to the
penitentiary, or unseating him from control
of the Nation's biggest union, or both. The
"war" between Hata and U.S. Attorney Gen-
eral Robert F. kennedy began prior to the
election of the former's brother to the Presi-
dency, at a time when the present Attorney
General was counsel for the McClellan
rackets committee.
We would certainly be the last to object
If a case can be inacle out under the law
against the Teamster chief. We would say
that bringing him to book for any crimes
of which he can be proven guilty is the duty
of the Justice Department and that the At-
torney General is on sound ground in
prosecuting wherever he feels that Hoffa has
broken the law.
What we do object to, however, is the
studied effort which has been made all
along by the Kennedy administration to
make the public believe that Hoffa alone,
of all the union basses in the country, is
guilty or has been guilty of acts hostile
to both their followers and to the country
as a whole. The administration's pur-
pose, of course, is to take credit with
the public for properly policing national
union operations through nailing Hoffa
to the cross, while at the same time
being very careful to do nothing to alienate
the political support of the union bosses
come the congressional elections and the
presidential contest of 1964.
Students of union operations diring the
past 30 years recognize that even if Hoffa is
guilty of all the crimes with which he has
been charged, he is not the only national
union boss who does not smell like a Illy.
Some of u,p, Avg, old eAovgh to recall that
Socialist Waite; mIt7o.1.44ey4 who customarily
wears a synthetic halo around his head and
by the Kennedys is regarded as a "labor
statesman," clawed his way to power in the
late 1930's by as violent-and brutal applica-
tion of Communist tactics as is recorded in
labor's history.
Nor is he the only ruling czar of the union
hierarchy who has unhesitatingly substi-
tuted force for reason when this was neces-
sary to gain or hold his powers. Further-
more, so far as this country and its institu-
tions are concerned, Reuther is a more dan-
gerous individual by far than is the Team-
ster Union chief. Hoffa may be proved any
of the various things that Bob Kennedy has
charged, but he has never, so far as the
public has been informed, been enamored
of the beauties of socialism.
He has never been in political business
with the leftwing Americans for Democratic
Action as Reuther has. Nor has Hoffa ever
undertaken, as Reuther has, to become a
figure in the business of Russian appease-
ment. We refer here to an ad sponsored by
the National Committee for a Sane Nuclear
Policy, Inc. Walter Reuther was listed as
a sponsor of this organization which advo-
cated giving the Russians what they want in
Berlin, while his brother, Victor, was listed
as a member of the board of directors.
Finally, Hoffa has never advocated a system
for having the union take over industry to
run it on the approved Socialist basis.
This viewpoint is not advanced as a de-
fense of Hoff a but in the hope of driving
home recognition of the fact that the admin-
istration's assault on Hoffa and its canoniza-
tion of Reuther and his crowd constitutes a
brazen political operation, steeped in hypo-
crisy. When a choice has to be made be-
tween a suspected larcenist and a Socialist,
we will take the accused thief every time.
IIA
,
CUBAN BASE OF RUSSIAN
OPERATIONS?A CLEAR AND
PRESENT DANGER
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Ohio [Mr. FEIGHAN] is recog-
nized for 60 minutes.
(Mr. FEIGHAN asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, in re-
cent weeks ,the Cuban case has been
heated up to crisis status by the imperial
Russians. This they have done by a
covert invasion of Cuba with thousands
of Russian, Czech, and other Communist
agents?the exact number yet un-
known?and with modern weapons of
war, from Russian Migs to ballistic mis-
siles. Cuba today is a Russian base of
military, political, and propaganda oper-
ations in the Western Hemisphere. No
Informed person can disagree with this
conclusion. 'There is room for debate on
' the degree of imminent danger this sit-
uation now presents to the United States
and all nations of this hemisphere, but
there are no longer grounds for the
slightest question as to whether Castro's
Cuba is a base of Russian operations in
this hemisphere.
There is a great deal of discussion and
speculation concerning the number of
Russian, Czech, Chinese, and other alien
Communist personnel in Cuba. There is
disagreement as to whether they are Red
army units, whethe rthey are in or out
of uniform, and whether they are tech-
nicians, advisers, security police, doctors,
or political agitators. On the matter of
military hardware, there is speculation
as to how many Russian Mig fighters
are available in Cuba, whether the mis-
siles supplied are short, medium, or long
range types, how many Russian torpedo
boats and submarines have been supplied
' the Castro regime. Still others speculate
on the nature and amount of Russian
electronic equipment now in Cuba, and
how effective it might be in disruptive
actions against our Cape Canaveral
operations.
But all this discussion and speculation
has led to the point where it now be-
clouds the stark reality of a Russian base
of operations in the Western Hemi-
sphere. A Russian base of operations
in this hemisphere, whether it be for
military, political, economic, diplomatic
or propaganda purposes is a clear and
present danger to the security of the
United States. That clear and present
danger now exists.
The only question now open to debate
by responsible Americans is the method,
or methods to be employed to remove
that clear and present danger.
The United States has the technologi-
cal capability to level Cuba and every-
body living there, all within a matter of
hours. Such action, aside from the
morality involved, would punish the
Cuban people who are already being
punished by the Russian controlled Cas-
tro regime. This we should not do.
The United States has the classical,
orthodox military power to liberate the
Cuban people from the tyranny of com-
munism. Such a military operation
could be very costly in terms of Ameri-
can lives sacrificed in the effort. But it
could be done and completed in a very
short period of time. But to so act
would subject us to the same charges
leveled against the Russian imperialists
for their aggression against the East
German people in 1953 and against the
peoples of Poland and Hungary in 1956.
I do not suggest that such charges should
deter us from acting on the Cuban crisis
or that such charges have any weight or
importance in the world of our times.
The Russians by their complete disre-
gard of such charges and the failure of
the West to make such charges mean-
ingful in international affairs must be
taken into account. But I do suggest
that Cuba can be liberated without the
direct use of our military strike capa-
bilities.
Within the past few days Khrushchev
and company made the threat that any
U.S. attack on Cuba "will be the be-
ginning of the unleashing of war." In-
termingled with this Russian threat
were the usual rattlings of nuclear
bombs and intercontinental missiles.
This bluff and bluster of the Russian
despots has frightened no red-blooded
Americans. More than anything else it
has stiffened the determination of our
people to do what must be done to rid
the Western Hemisphere of Russian in-
terference in the tranquility of our af-
fairs. President Kennedy has made it
clear that such Russian threats will not
deter our Nation from doing what must
be done in the global struggle between
freedom and tyranny. The real irony
of the Cuban case is that the Russians
are engaging in massive interference in
the affairs of the Cuban people, they are
providing their stooge Castro with the
means to cement his tyranny over the
Cuban people, and, they are building for
themselves an all-purpose base of opera-
tions in Cuba from which they can
spread their special brand of terror and
tyranny throughout this hemisphere.
Bluntly stated, the Russians are now
Approved For Relealse 2007/01/20 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
Approve0Tor ReTease /01/20 CIA-R11:Y54B00346R000200150004-3
19090 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
engaged in a massive but covert invasion
of Cuba.
The Cuban case presents a classic ex-
ample of the Russian policy of "libera-
.
tion" ip operation.
be recalled that N. Khrushchev,
ithin sisperiod of 10 days after a sum-
snit confrontation with President Eisen-
hower. at Camp David, visited Peiping,
China, to take part in the :,0th anniver-
aarY Of 'the Communist takeover of main-
land China. When he arrived at the air-
port in Peiping, he delivered a policy
speech in which he defines. the Russian
, doctrine of liberation. He explained
that Communist wars of liberation were
just wars because they brought commu-
nism to peoples whom he claimed were
exploited under the system of capitalism.
At the same time he explained that any
efforts of the free world to resist these
Communist wars of liberation would be
considered as acts of aggression, In
, other words, according to Khrushchev,
the Communists are free to make war on
the free world and the free world has no
Tight to defend itself. This Sort of up-
? side clown thinking is par for the Rus-
? sian thought course in international af-
fairs.
? The Russian policy of liberation is be-
ing applied to Cuba today Castro was
-the front man in the initial stages of
this operation. The Cuba a people were
ripe for revolution?a revolution to bring
justice to the social-economic order
Which had existed for too long in Cuba.
Castro was built up as the agent of social
ustice--he announced a program of so-
-eial pscl economic reforms which had
powerful appeal among the Cuban peo-
- le. When the handful of Castroites
anded in Cuba the people rallied to his
catite. There was no real opriosition in
a popular sense to the Castro liberation
.efforts. He was hailed as a man of the
people. Batista fled the country after a
tevi localized military skirmishes. Cas-
tro was soon in control of the country.
,Palci he soon put an absolute, Comminist
COritrol upon the backs of the people he
had promised to liberate into sooial-jus-
tice. .
The second phase of Communist
lib-
*ration efforts was launched in Cuba by
Castro and company. All opposition was
,ubjected to the typical rtussian process
liquidation. The press, radio, and
.-television were put under control of the
-Castro regime and used by them 'as a
stool or promise, terror, and agitation.
-All opposition political parties were out-
'Jawed. Marxism was introdueed into the
school system. The Catholic Church was
?,persented and silenced The courts
were used as tools of persecution and
tight control, 'rather than the promised
-instruments of justice. igoon the well
trained and dedicated Corr munist agents
in the Castro regime Came out into the
open and soon they nide it clear to all
that they were the ones who were in con-
trol of Cub..
The people of Cuba were deceived?
rthey were robbed of the just fruits of
'-`their'revolution by Castro and company.
eseritinentlay.the people led to opposi-
tion without the support ofthe United
states and Other nations of' this hemi-
sphere led to a mass exodus of peoble
from Cuba. Today there are hundreds
of thousands of freedom loving Cubans
in the United States, the Caribbean area,
Central and South America. Today
these refugees are the seeds of Castro
disaffection?tomorrow they must be the
seeds of Cuban liberation from Russian
despotism.
The third phase of Communist lib-
eration ooerations then became neces-
sary. A rising tide of opposition to the
Castro regime in Cuba and growing re-
sentment _throughout this hemisphere
confronted the Kremlin with a major
tactical decision. To save Castro and
company would require all out military
support, but would action to satisfy this
requirement arouse the United States
and plunge the world into war? Action
to 'save t:se Castro regime would, how-
ever, give them a firm base of operations
in the Western Hemisphere if such ac-
tion was successful. This was the Rus-
sian dilemma. It is now clear that the
Russian iuling class decided to take the
risks involved?but the risks should be
reduced by covert methods of supply and
support. This is precisely' the pattern
of action the Russians are applying to
Cuba today; there can be no reason-
able doubts about this.
A few days ago poet Robert Prost had
an interview with Khrushchev and re-
ported that Khrushchev told him that
the United States was too liberal to fight
for its rights. This is a dangerous as-
sumption by Khrushchev no matter
what circumstances or experience, past
or present, led him to make it. It was
that false type of assumption on the
part of Hitler which led to World War
II and will plunge us into World War
III. This false assumption by Khru-
shchev must be corrected now, before
issues on a broader plane get out of
hand.
The fourth phase of Communist libera-
tion operations from, their Cuban base
and bridgehead will follow soon after
the covert military buildup now under-
way is completed. It will involve the
_ use of Communist Cuban frontmen,
much like the Russians are now using
their German Communist frontmen in
Berlin and in East Germany. Let us not
forget that the Russians used non-Rus-
sian frositmen in the Korean war of
Communist aggression and in the war
now raging in Vietnam and Laos. They
will do the same thing in the Western
Hemisphere. This is not a guesswork
judgment, it is simply based on a sound
knowledge- of how the Communist so-
called wars of liberation are carried out.
To suggest that the Kremlin will not use
these tactics in Cuba is to turn our backs
on reality. One thing we must credit
the Russians with being consistent in?
that is, the exercise of their time-proven
imperial tactics. -
I urge that steps be taken now to
break up the well-laid Russian plans for
'Cuba and the Western Hemisphere. It
is not too late to prevent the Russian
military buildup in Cuba. If we act now,
the cost of victory will be small compared
to what it will be if we hesitate, if we
wait until the Russians are prepared to
launch phase 4 of their war against the
nations of the Western Hemisphere.
September 26L
There can be and no doubt will be
honest disagreement as to the methods
best suited to breaking up the covert
Russian invasion of Cuba. There is no
room for disagreement on the need for
action now.
I propose the following courses of ac-
tion by our Government, calculated to
remove the clear and present danger of
communism in the Western Hemisphere
and to relieve Khrushchev of the serious
miscalculation he has made concerning
our will to fight in defense of our rights:
First, The regime of Fidel Castro be
declared by our Government to be an
agent of a foreign power, that is, im-
perial Russia, and as such charged with
interferring in the internal affairs of the
Cuban people.
Second. The Cuban exiles from Rus-
sian tyranny in their homeland be au-
thorized by democratic process to
establish a government-in-exile, such
government to be accorded diplomatic
recognition by the United States. This
action will give practical support to the
principle of self-determination, a right
now denied the Cuban people in their
homeland.
Third. A complete naval and air
blockade be established around Cuba by
the United States, for the declared pur-
pose of excluding the entry into that
occupied country of all persons residing
in or citizens of any country or area be-
hind the Iron or Bamboo Curtains and to
confiscate all manner of arms, weapons,
instruments, implements, and other sup-
plies of war. A quarantine against the
seeds of war and imperialism in the
peaceful area of the Western Hemi-
sphere accords with both the historic
ideals of all the nations in this region
and the realities of contemporary inter-
national affairs.
Fourth. A public declaration by our
Government recognizing the right of the
Cuban people to liberate themselves
from the tyranny of imperial Russian
communism and the coequal right of
Cubans in exile to advocates assist and
by other means to further the liberation
eff their homeland from the present alien
regime which now controls and exploits
it. A declaration of this character will,
like the Declaration of Independence is-
sued by our Founding Fathers, resound
throughout the world as an announce-
ment of our return as a nation to the
active role of political leadership of
freedom's cause.
Fifth. An invitation should be issued
to all the nations in the Western Hemi-
sphere to join with our Government in
support of these courses of action, prior
to their public promulgation but with a
request for decision within a set period
not to exceed 48 hours. This procedure
will determine the dependability of our
treaty allies in the Western Hemisphere
and at the same time should establish
a reliable priority index for the purpose-
ful administration of our Alliance for
Progress program. Those nations which
subscribe to and agree to support the
courses of action herein outlined should
be guaranteed that the mountains of
redtape about which they complain in'
connection with the Alliance, win be cut,
those nations which do not subscribe to
Approve-0 For Release 2007/0-1/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R00Q_O
Approved For Relea
.1962 CO
and agree to support this action program
should .be reminded that we have an
abundance of redtape artists in our Gov-
ernment anxiouS to review their plans
for progress.
Sixth. An invitation should be ex-
tended to the Unitcd nations to act as
custodians for the people detained and
for all weapons and supplies of war con-
fiscated through the naval and air block-
ade established hy the leadership of the
United States. As to the people de-
tained, the full provisions of the Geneva
Convention pertaining to custody, care,
and repatriation of prisoners of war and
civilian internees should apply. As to
weapons and supplies of war confiscated,
the United Nations should be requested
to establish an exhibit of same, open to
the general public but with particular
reference to the respective delegations
accredited to that body.
Mr. Speaker, the political action pro-
gram which I have proposed is by no
means a new Or novel One. All its ele-
ments are well known to students of the
Russian problem and will surely merit
the support of American scholars on the
plague of imperialism and colonialism.
For too long the policies of our Gov-
ernment have been formulated and
guided by that small but entrenched
group of Sovietologists, sometimes called
the Kremlinologists. That group has
demonstrated an expertness in following
the mythology of Marxism and that ex-
pertness has drenched Our national secu-
rity policies with such _fantasies as the
evolution theory, the escalation into nu-
clear war theory, and the delusion that
time is on our side in the global struggle
with the Russian despots., That same
group has argued there is a finality to
events which have taken place in that
vast area of the world occupied by the
Russian Communists? that there is noth-
ing we can do to change the conditions
of evil imposed upon one-third of the
human family. Moreover, that group of
entrenched Sovietologists has resisted
and defeated all efforts within our Gov-
ernment to develop plans whereby the
political exiles from the nations now oc-
cupied by the Russian Communists could
take an active role in restoring freedom
to their homelands. Twelve years ago
Congress authorized such action by the
President and provided up to $100 mil-
lion in support of it through the Mutual
Security Act. Two Presidents made
strong efforts to implement this intent
of Congress, but the internal resistance
of American Sovietologists thwarted
their efforts. That negativism, that de-
featism has infected our policy on Cuba
and it is spreading rapidly to the conduct
of our affairs with all our Latin neigh-
bors.
Ten p or years ago our Nation was
t ?
preoccupied with the challenge of lib-
erating the once free and independent
nations of Central-East gurope from the
yoke of Russian Communist imperialism.
The initiative, the opportunity to act
was placed in our hands. We talked
much but we did not act. Time and the
tide of human events would not await
our consensus forming processes. In
June df 195$ the East Germans rose in
? No. 170-27
e 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64E300346R000200150004-3
I.GRESSIONAL RECORD ?1101
revolt against Communist occupation.
As a nation we stood aghast, politically
paralyzed and the Russians seized the
Initiative by putting down this freedom
revolt by brute force. Then in the spring
of 1956 the Poles at Poznan revolted
against their Russian occupier. Here
again we stood aghast and politically
paralyzed as Russian tanks restored their
terrorizing peace of communism. In
October of 1956 the Hungarian people
rose as one against the Russian occupier,
to rout the vaunted Red Army and to
restore their national independence for
4 historic days. Here again we stood
aghast, politically paralyzed. Our pol-
icymakers?the Sovietologists and Krem-
linologists?were shocked at this unex-
pected reversal of their theories of
evolution and finality. So shocked in
fact that they allowed the victory of the
Hungarian freedom fighters to escalate
into a terrible defeat for freedom's cause.
At the time those world shaking events
, seemed a long way away from our tran-
quil life in the United States. A false
sense of security was built upon the mi-
rage of distance. Liberty-loving Ameri-
cans were shocked at our failure to re-
spond to freedom's call. But the sooth-
ing and false mirage of distance was ap-
plied-in quantity to the moral revulsion
which gripped our people. A belief that
"it can't happen here" was nurtured in
the public mind.
Mr. Speaker, how different things are
these 10 years later. One hears little or
no talk about liberating the nations of
central-east Europe from the yoke of
imperial Russian communism. In fact,
such talk has been branded as warmon-
gering and the brand has burned so deep
on the official life of Washington that
only the most courageous dares to raise
his voice in support of the cause of the
captive nations. And worse, the De-
partment of State has vetoed the estab-
lishment of a Select Commitee on the
Captive Nations by the House on the
grounds that such action would be prej-
udical to delicate negotiations now un-
derway with the Russian despots.
The battle of the cold war is no longer
primarily in Europe. Today it is pri-
marily in the Western Hemisphere?
some 90 miles off the shorelines of Flori-
da. Now, the American people are de-
prived of the soothing mirage of dist-
ance; for 90 miles is but a stone's throw
away as distance and time are measured
today. The clear and the present danger
of Russian Communism is now in Cuba,
90 miles off the shorelines of Florida.
Mn. Speaker, it is not pleasant to think
about what Americans 10 years from now
will be faced with if the longstanding
national security policies with regard to
imperial Russia are allowed to continue
in force. Those 10 years will fade into
minutes if we stand by and allow the
Russtans to establish a secure and all-
purpose base of operations in Cuba.
The clear and present danger in Cuba
tells us that we must quickly assume any
risks, pay any price, bear any burden,
meet any hardships and accept any sac-
rifices demanded of us to eliminate that
threat to our security and to the tran-
quillity of the Western Hemisphere.
Approved For, Release 2007/01
SE 19091
The action program which I have pro-
posed is the least we can do for ourselves
and for future generations of Americans.
Mr. DULSKI. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. 104IC+HAN. I yield to my good
friend, the very able gentleman from
New York.
Mr. DTJLSKI. I congratulate the gen-
tleman for a forthright examination of
the Cuban crisis and for the realistic
program of action which he has pro-
posed. I agree the time is now for ac-
tion to remove the clear and present
danger to our security presented by the
Russian base of operations in Cuba. My
question is, Would action by our Govern-
ment to establish a naval and air block-
ade of Cuba be regarded in law as an
act of war?
Mr. FEIGHAN. Let me read you a
definition of a blockade under interna-
tional law. I quote:
An act of war carried out by the warships
of a belligerent, detailed to prevent access
to or departure from a defined part of the
enemy's coast.
This definition appeared in an article
by James Reston in the New York Times
of September 16, 1962. There has been
much talk about it since, particularly
the "act of war" aspect. It is time we
took an honest look at this definition.
We are not in a court of law as Mr. Res-
ton seems to suggest; we are confronted
with a clear and present danger.
The facts are these, in the Cuban sit-
uation:
First. A war is already underway in
the entire Caribbean area; an advanced
phase of the cold war with the Russian
engaged in a massive but covert inva-
sion of Cuba. The hot phase of this war,
like that in Korea and Vietnam, will fol-
low unless this Russian invasion is
stopped and the Russian base of opera-
tions isolated.
Second. No formal declaration of war
was declared by the Russians, they never
resort to such legal niceties. Law,
whether international or any other kind,
has no meaning to the Russians.
Third. The physical presence of Rus-
sian personnel and Russian military
equipment anywhere in the Western
Hemisphere is more than sufficient evi-
dence to conclude that a state of war
already exists. Castro and the Castro-
ites are not a factor precedent to this
conclusion?they are an accidental fac-
tor since they have publicly stated their
attachment and allegiance to the global
objectives of communism. Every Ameri-
can schoolboy knows what those objec-
tives are.
Fourth. To suggest that the legalities
of war, as observed by civilized nations,
should apply to Castro's Cuba is to ac-
cept the Khrushchev definition of the
Russian policy of liberation. That defi-
nition holds that Communists are free
to undertake any and all actions to lib-
erate the still free countries into corn-
munism, but the free world is prohibited
from taking any actions to defend itself.
This double standard of international
behavior is a fixed and unchangeable
part of the Russian Communist con-
spiracy.
20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
Approved iFqr R
IA-RDP64a00346R000200150004-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
Fifth. the United States is a belliger-
nt in the Cuban crisis whether we like
at not, The Russians have forced us
rt position. position. We are marled out
the target of the Russian buildup in
.44 no niceties of law can remove
is realitY from our predicament.
Dift. "DUrSKI. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield for a question? '
Mr.FEIGHAN. I yield to my distin-
guished CoTleague.
Mr. IYULtaCI. I agree with the gentle=
Inan When he says we are not in a court
of law, When dealing with the problem of
imperial Russian communism. Sneaking
of legal agreements made with the Ang-
olans, former President Truman has time
and again Painted out that the Russians
broke every agreernent with us as soon
.as 'it served their imperial purposes.` ft "
Is dangerous for Us to assume that preC-
edents,or opinions on international law
? would carry any weight with the RtiO-
alaris We are, as the gentleman_ has go
?Clearly_ painted out, belligE rents iri the
Cuban crisis because Rwsian actions:
there, have ,forced us to that position.
I have this further question. Our col-
league from Ohio is a recognized expert
.,t on the matter of captive niiioni and as
lin expert, does he regaI'd Liba-ag a Can-
tive nation Under the terms .KPiii?iie Law
.86-90?,
Mr; FEIGHAN. I most 'OeftainlY ao
regard Cuba as a "captive nation under
the terms of Public LaW16-911 Cuba Was
once a'"free 'and". indenen defir-iraffori.
Cuba is no longer a free aneTindenendent
natkon. The people of Culaa hake' been
Zobbe4 of their national Mdenendefice
by the intrigue, subversion, and terror-
Istic reAlme of Fidel Castro, which-re--
gime is just as much a stooge of MoscOw
as Is the Communist regime in *_Wa,rSaW,
,Budapest, or any other country liSted
In Public Law 86-90. frinif.arly thepeo.:,.
pie of Cuba aspire to regain their free-
dom and national independence. Thole
aspirations" serve as a brake dri the 'ac-
tivities of Moscow's regime, in Havana.
Cuba is today nothing more than a 'cal-
ant of the Russian imperialists, and an
exploited colony, to be sure "
Cuba is nothing more than a "colony
of rtusEian imperialists and an exploited
tolgny, to be sure.
Mr. lDULSKI. Mr. Sneaker? will the
ientlema,n yield furthe r?
. PEIGITAN. I yield. -
Mr. DULSKI. In keeping with the
'pirit or international law r imagine that
I could submit an amendment to Nblic
8-9OLa 'defining Cuba as' a captive
?
potion.
Mr. FEIGHAN. I COL.CUi lb tour
astute observations and -,I hone ? the
"gentleman will do it.
Mr. PVCIN8KL,Mr. Sneaker, will the
gentleman 'yield?' -
Mr. IrEIGIIAN. I yield. -
Mr. :PUCINSKI. Vie- gentleman has
made a Very(fine statement here, and it
certainly describes the lid' ugliheig -61
Ahe', Comniunist takeover Cuba. I
tee 'with him. I think ProbIeni
1)1'Pb:rand interest to all Alfieri-cans'.
this statement. As a matter of fact he
has covered up the complete substitu-
tion of ComMunist economy in Cuba
which has immobilized the Cuban peo-
ple; he has them in a constant state of
fear and literally hysteria, but he is
trying to appease the Cuban people by
saying that ?the United States is pre-
paring an aggressinn against Cuba.
This afternoon in the United Nations
the Communist punpet representative of
-Cuba challenged "the statement of our
own American Ambassador, Adlai Stev-
enson; when Adlai Stevenson tried to
assure thE'Cubans that no aggression or
invasion was planned. So in the light
of this I wander if the gentleman cares
to explain what he means when he de-,
scribes the United States as a belligerent
vi s-6,-Vis the Cuban Republic.
- Mr. PEGErAN. We are a belligerent
against the imperialism of Moscow. The
Government of Cuba is the stooge gov-
ernment of Moscow. I am taking a very
realistic approach to this situation. We
certainly are in a cold war. The activi-
ties of this cold war in Cuba have placed
us in the position which I consider to
be one of belligerence. The purpose "of
my propwals is to avoid a hot war, Ko-
rean StYle, in the -Western Hemisphere.
Mr.-PUCINSKI: If the gentleman will
-nelinit an observation, I think perhaps
the gentleman and I understand each
ether. Ihe- gentleman is correct that
we are a belligerent against any kind of
tyranny z,nywhere in the world, but he
is sneaking Of a basic technicality that
outsiders might misinterpret. I would
not want the 'Eentleman's perfectly sin-
cere and proper' 'Words to be twisted
around by the totally controlled Com-
munist press in Cuba and have Mr. Cas-
tro's controlled press come out with
headlines tomorrow that a Member of
the American Congress admits that the
?United. States Is belligerent. I am sure
that is not what the gentleman means.
Mr. FEIGHAN. Yes, I stand by what
I said. If the Communists want to use
that, let them do it. tut I want to thank
the gentLeman very much for his inter-
est.
Mr. PILLION. Mr. Speaker, will 1,he
gentleman yield?
Mr; PEIGHAN. I yield.
Mr. PILLION. Did Mr. Reston in his
article in the New York Times suggest
that We refrain from the blockade
- against Cuba because it would constitute
a violation of international law? Is that
my understanding?
Mr. FE"IGHAN. Yes, as I read the
Reston article that was his intent.
--ivrfAnttioN:--bid Mr. Reston also
state in his newspaper article' that the
Soviet Government and all satellite or
bloc nations have never adhered to any
Part of international law as we know it?
11-d13e statelhain his article, I ask the
'gentleman from-Ohio?
Mr. VEIGHAN. I do not recall ex-
actly, but if he did he would be correct.
Mr. PILLION. That is right. And is
if Mr.-Reston's attitude or position that
We abide by international law, the comity
of nations, in spite of the fact that the
Soviet and all Communist satellite na-
tions have nothing but contempt for
international law?
" 'w6ne,tifthe gentlerian 'Weida be goa
;enough to elaborate what lie Means When
?-he says that 'the United States is a 'bel-
ligerent. Mr. Castro has been Making
September
Mr. FEIGHAN. FEIGHAN. Mr. Reston, in his
article made no mention whatever of
the miserable Russian record on per-
formance to the precedents of interna-
tional law. In fact, his article expressed
a complete lack of knowledge on this all-
important consideration.
I disagree with Mr. Reston.
Mr. PILLION. I too disagree with him
when the future of this Nation is at
stake, when he would suggest resorting
to refinements and technicalities of In-
ternational law.
I might say I cannot help but recall
it was Mr. Matthews, of the New York
Times, and there were other writers of
the New York Times, who created a great
deal of the atmosphere in this country
that encouraged, if it was not actually
the principal cause of Castro becoming
the dictator of Cuba and in turn Khru-
shchev taking over Castro and Cuba. I
wonder about the advice that the New
York Times keeps giving to the people of
this country in the field of foreign policy
and foreign relations. The Reston arti-
cle reminds me of the job they did in
seeing that Castro became the dictator
of Cuba.
Mr. FEIGHAN. The gentleman's ob-
servations concur with the findings of
the long and careful inquiry conducted
by the Senate on the Communist take-
over of Cuba.
Mr. PILLION. Was it Matthews on
foreign policy that created the crisis
we are facing, this desperate crisis we
are facing in Cuba today? I think the
dishonor and discredit for that can in
substantial measure be given, allocated,
and pinpointed with the New York
Times.
I would like to say to the gentleman
that his perceptive presentation is proof
of his full comprehension of the Soviet
Communist complete war. I give my
unqualified support for the positive ac-
tions recommended by the gentleman
from Ohio. This Nation cannot afford
to continue to deal with Cuba or the
threat of Soviet Communist world civil
war in pious platitudes or vague gen-
eralities. Positive, effective, courageous
action must be taken now by the United
States. We can no longer temporize or
postpone the difficult decisions necessary
to abruptly and finally end the black-
mailing Soviet aggressiveness every-
where in the world, including Cuba.
I wish to commend the gentleman for
everything he has said and for the work
he has done in the past in trying to
awaken this country to the dangers that
this country is undergoing at the hands
Of the Soviet and its satellites, including
Cuba and Castro.
Mr. FEIGHAN. I thank the gentle-
man very much. I am also mindful of
and appreciative of the tremendous
work the gentleman has' done to alert
the American people and Members of
Congress on the imminent danger we are
in at the present perilous time in our
history.
-Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. FEIGHAN. I yield to the gentle-
man from Illinois.
Mr. PUCINSKI. I have heard this
colloquy between the gentleman in the
-ApprQvgejf_91: Rerease 2007/01-120,-CIA-RDP64B00346R0
Approved For Release 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
we an e p evious speaker. We hear
about editorials and discussions =Abe
whole subject. I thought I had been
listening very attentively to the debate,
but I have not heard from either of
the two previous speakers any concrete,
precise suggestions as to what we should
do. People say that we ought to take
action, What does the gentleman mean?
What is meant by the people who want
to engage in this discussion? Certainly
no one can minimize the extent of the
problem, and I think we ought to narrow
our views as to what exactly can be
done.
Mr. FEIGHAN. say to my colleague
from Illinois, that the program which
I have presented could, not be more
definitive, more complete, or more
realistic. What I have proposed is for
the consideration of those who have re-
sponsibility for defending our policy on
Cuba. The program I have proposed
speaks for itself.
Mr. PILLION. Had the gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. PuciNszi], been pres-
ent last night, I talked allout this ques-
tion for about an hew. I gave a listing
of positive actions which we could take,
and not generalities. I propose, when
the Cuban resolution is presented to the
House, to present amendments to the
resolution which will provide for positive
action on the part of this Government,
everything short of nuclear war, to see
that the blackmail Soviet missle-based
threat in Cuba is not completed, be-
cause this Nation Cannot live under
the blackmail threats of missiles 90 Miles
away.
I thank the gentleman,
Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
back the balance of my time.
THE ENEMY AT OUR GATE
The SPEAKER pro stempore (Mr.
LIBONATI) . Under previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. FLOOD], is recognized for 30
minutes.
(Mr. FLOOD asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his remarks,
and to include extraneous matter.)
Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, on many
previous occasions, I have addressed this
body concerning significant aspects of
the mounting crisis in the crucial Carib-
bean, long ago recognized by our cele-
brated naval historian, Admiral Mahan,
as "the Mediterranean of the Americas."
It gives me no satisfaction to state
that, with the current landings in Cuba,
of Soviet ships, personnel, and munitions
of war, my verified predictions have been
realized, probably in a greater degree
than is now apparent. But it is, indeed,
gratifying to note in the RECORDS of
September 6 and 7 that the danger is
being realized in both Houses of Con-
gress, and that there are strong demands
from widely separated sections of the
Nation for action necessary for full pro-
tection of the national interests and the
security of the Western Hemisphere.
At this point, Mr. Speaker, I would
commend the gentlemen in this body
from California [Mr, Houma], Alabama
[Mr. SELDEN], California [Mr. LIPS-
COMB], Michigan [Mr. CHAMBERLIN], and
Florida [Mr. FASCELL] for their illumi-
nating statements in the RECORD of
September 6. Furthermore, I urge that
they be read by every Member of the
Congress. I would also urge the careful
study of my address, "Khruschev Doc-
trine Versus Monroe Doctrine," in the
RECORD of April 12, 1962, which supplies
a plan of action in the way of a definite
program for the United States that has
deep roots in American history, which
need not be traced here.
When examining the geopolitical
events since 1945, one matter that stands
out in crystal clarity is that the world
revolutionary movement, known as the
international Communist conspiracy, has
operated with well-designed plans for
securing control of strategic areas of the
world.
In the Far East, this fact is illustrated
by the takeover of Indonesia with its
island barrier dominating the communi-
cations between the Pacific and Indian
Oceans and forming an avenue from
Asia to Australia. In the Mediterra-
nean, it is shown by the indirect control
of the Suez Canal and present threats
to the Strait of Gibraltar. In the Carib-
bean, the same process has resulted in
making Cuba a Soviet satellite and in
the establishment of revolutionary.
beachheads in British Guiana and
Venezuela, areas which cover both flanks
of the Atlantic approaches to the key
target for the conquest of that strategic
area?the Panama Canal.
The steady, systematic acquisitions of
these objectives without open warfare
is one of the most brilliant achievements
in military and naval history, which
simply could not be accidental. Instead,
such conquests reflect the guiding hand
of a directing general staff of transcend-
ent ability, rendered more effective by
its conspiratorial and secret apparatus
and operations that are linked with
known international socialistic elements
within our own governmental circles.
The problem of meeting the threat in
the Caribbean, therefore, rises above
personal, party, group, or any other spe-
cial considerations and must be han-
dled on the highest plane of statesman-
ship with but one end in view?the se-
curity of the United States and protec-
tion of the Western World.
Already, we have delayed too long for
our safety. Daily we receive alarming
reports of the strengthening of com-
munistic revolutionary power at our
back door, conveniently located for fir-
ing missiles with atomic warheads into
key areas in our country.
Nor should it be overlooked that for
many months Soviet trawlers have been
"fishing" along our coasts?quite a fishy
story. If they are seeking fish in West-
ern waters, they would be where the fish
are, that is to say, such spots as the
Grand Banks off Newfoundland. In-
stead, these vessels have undoubtedly
been engaged in extensive reconnais-
sance for the operation of nuclear sub-
marines against our seaboard States.
In speaking so strongly, Mr. Speaker,
I would emphasize that I, like other
Americans, am no enemy of the Russian
people, but their friend. They have long ?
been unfortunate victims of alien in-
19093
vaders who, in the most brutal fashion,
have not hesitated to use them in con-
flicts with our own and other countries.
Let us not wait until the trap is sprung
and our coastal cities destroyed, but let
us take adequate precautionary meas-
ures now before the situation becomes
more critical and altogether out of hand.
As to the necessity for such action,
there can be no doubt, for Communists
have traditionally disdained to conceal
their aims and have openly declared
their purposes of world revolution.
Their ultimate objective is the United
States.
I fully realize that there are many,
some of them in high positions, who
would not take the necessary precau-
tionary measures until some so-called
overt act occurs. What could be more
overt than the military buildup now
taking place in Cuba? Do Miami and
Cape Canaveral have to be destroyed be-
fore we realize that our country is
marked for destruction? Under the
vastly increased power of modern weap-
ons of war, the overt act is constantly
receding into the background and, in this
regard, we must be realistic or we shall
be doomed for destruction.
Since the proper precautionary meas-
ures, if taken now, would serve to avert
the threatening dangers and world war
III, I urge the following program:
(a) Make definite and reaffirm by
resolution of the Congress the Monroe
Doctrine as applying to intervention
through infiltration and subversion with
greater emphasis on the need for main-
tenance of this most vital policy for the
salvation of the Western World; and
(b) Make definite and reaffirm our
historic, indispensable, and time-proven
policies for exclusive control in perpetu-
ity over the Panama Canal and Canal
Zone; and
(c) Liberate the people of Cuba from
alien revolutionary dictatorship and as-
sist them in the restoration of constitu-
tional government through free elec-
tions; and
(d) Reactivate the special service
squadron, augmented as may be neces-
sary during emergencies, on a perma-
nent basis to serve as a symbol of liberty
and as an assurance of security.
The program for the liberation of
Cuba, Mr. Speaker, should be taken by
any one or more of the high contracting
parties to the Inter-American Treaty of
Reciprocal Assistance in the exercise of
individual or collective self-defense, to
forestall or combat intervention, domi-
nation, control, or colonization in what-
ever form, by the subversive forces
known as international communism and
its agencies in the Western Hemisphere.
Such actions, as comprehended in this
program, Mr. Speaker, will supply a
foundation of strength, so essential for
the formulation of policies derived from
a reasoned line of thought that aim to ?
improve conditions as seen and under-
stood. Besides, it would enable us to
avoid the tragedies that always follow
from crisis decisions.
Mr. Speaker, and fellow Members, I
have given these subjects my most earn-
est study through the years of my service
here and have sought to act and speak in
Approved For Release 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
Approved For Release 2007/01/20 :. CIA-RDP64E300346R000200150004-3
19094 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE September gO
an objective manner. I ' have sensed that Might be derived by me from having - 2. Display, under Executive order of Sen-
these perils coming and, on various oc- been right is a barren one, for my foremost tember 17, 1960, by the United -States, of the
casions, have ventured the judgment concern is the security of my country at this Panama flag over the Canal Zone territory,
which might avert them. All we need is time of peril, against the overwhelming opposition of the
As much of what will follow relates to the House of Representatives, formally expressed.
leadership of positive character which Republic ofI aPanama, I wish to stress at the 3. Withdrawal by the United States of
will prove inspirational to our people. outset he
m in no sense an enemy of recognition of Communist Cuba.
The hour has now arrived when we that country, or of its people. On the con- 4. Removal by the United States of re-
must act, and act quickly in full force trary, I am devoted to the best interests of strictions on the importation and distribu-
. and effect, if we are to Eurvive. While both enc, believe that those interests can be tion of subversive literature in our country.
we temporize and hesitate, the enemy served only by the unhampered control of 5. Issue in April 1961 by the Department of
our Government of the maintenance, opera- State of a white paper indicating U.S. sup-
is at our gates probing for spots of weak- tion, sanitation, and protection of the port of "authentic and autonomous revolu-
Khan and Tamerlane, in all their nith-
ness through which to enter. Ghengis itretma
j tested
Panama Canal ini
n accordance with our his- tion" throughout the Americas, which ac-
Isthmian policies as em- tion s certainly not a valid function of ca.r
less actions, were never more cruel, more bodied i a basic canal treaties. Government.
savage, and relenthss than are the To the task of clarification of what is an 6. Failure on April 19, 1961, of the at-
bloody monsters of the gremlin, who explosive situation in our own backyard, I tempted liberation of Soviet Cuba under
are fs.natically and avowedly committed now address myself, with the request not to circumstances indicating subversive penetra-
be interrupted by questions until my state- tion of the U.S. security agencies.
- to the complete destruction of our coun- merit is completed. 7. Declaration on May 1, 1961, by Premier
try, the great citadel of freedom.
PiiNAMA REACTS TO CUBAN INSULTS Castro, following capture of the liberators,
All of this, Mr. Speaker, the people of that Cuba is a Soviet satellite and his later
. In the crisis now mounting in the Carib- admission that he has long been a secret
Our country know, and they are deeply
bean, si gnificant events requiring decisive Marxist-Leninist and that he had dellae?
agitated 'and concerned. They wish not measures have thronged upon us ately concealed this fact from the Cubanll
.
for war and renewed sacrifice Of the But, as so often happens in a storm, a rift people during the course of the recent Cuban
priceless youth of our land: On the in the '21ouds shows some blue sky. This revolution.
other hand, they desire - avoidance of appeared in Panama on December 14, 1961, 8. Establishment of a Communist beach-
such dreadful result, and are ready to when the Government of that country under head in British Guiana by Cheddi Jagan, the
support all immediate action re'quired the leadership of President Roberto F. Chiari newly elected Communist premier.
reacted to studied insults from Fidel Castro 9. Assent on November 2, 1961, to Com-
for its prevention. and brcke diplomatic relations with Soviet munist-stimulated demands of Panama for
Today, they are far ahead of the legis- Cuba, retroactive to December 9. Thus, once new treaty negotiations, despite our generous
' lative and executive agencies of our Gov- worldth Beralit Berlin,
despite preoccupa- concessions in 1936, 1942, and 1955.
eminent in appraising the peril confront- ZEti Congo, uGbolae, Indonesia,eteh From this cursory summary, Mr. Speaker,
ing us and what should be done to com- Laos, a id other ,distanotnt it is clear that the Caribbean is well on its
bat it. We Must not daily, we Must not focused on the crucial Caribbean, rang ago s way to becoming a Red lake, with Cuba and
, hesitate; but in the face_ of impending recognissed by Admiral Mahan as the Medi- British Guiana, now admittedly Soviet satel-
terranean of the Americas. litre, covering both flanks of the Atlantic
disaster, we must act in clear, direct, and
positive manner to drive from Western UNITED STATES?ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE approaches to the Panama Canal, itself un-
der Bolshevist-inspired juridical attack.
. shores the greatest, most powerful, and What is the nature of the sinister force
most Cruel foe of liberty that the world which, through expertly conducted central- PANAMA FLAG ENDANGER'S CANAL ZONE
ized direction, is exerting its pressures in so SOVEREIGNTY
' has ever known. ' ' ? - -' ? -- many strategic points in the world today? Of the long series of events contributing
Why stand we idle while that enemy-- is It is not a political party in the generally toward the present crisis in the Caribbean,
knocking at our gates? Mr.-PreSident of understood sense but pervasive action and the precedent set by Executive order on Sep-
- ' the United. States and .fellow Members intelligence arms of communistic revolu- temper 17, 1960, directing display of the Pan-
of the Congress; let Us unite, in the spirit tionary imperialism, which constitute con- ama flag over the Canal Zone territory, is
of our- great, historic past to repel- this - spiratorial fifth. columns in every key spot, transcendent.
great threat. Our cause is -just - and some government agencies, and influential In Panama, this action was taken as a
sections of the mass news media. Its oh- complete reversal of the U.S. position on
' clothed with moral might. With prompt, jective in warfare is destruction of the will the question of sovereignty and as formal
united action we shall inicceed. ' tp resist in advance of possible hostilities. recognition of basic sovereignty of Panama
' Let others do as they may; as for me, Emboldened by a long train of successes over the Canal Zone, as well as a lever for
-I am ready to -perform My dirtY- to the resulting from its calculated aggressiveness wringing future concessions, including set-
utmost to stay the march of despotism and ensouraged by Western policies of placa- ting a time for the transfer by the United
throughout the stricken- world. ' ' tion and vacillation, this destructive force states to Panama of the canal as a gift, pure
As supplementary to the above:I quote
has taken over tremendous areas and great and simple. Imagine, Mr. Speaker, the im-
"
masses of population and imposed despotic plications of this demand from a country
the full text of my address to the House govern ments of the most violent comnau- whose very creation grew out of the move-
:Oft April 12, 1062, together with its docu- mstic character. These successes have in- meat to construct the Panama Canal.
mentation, and urge that it be read by all deed led the fires of communistic revolu- In other countries, the action of the Presi-
.
concerned with the subject of hemi- tionary fanaticism and - immeasurably dent made the United States a diplomatic
Spheric security, strengthened the zeal and effort to bring the laughing stock and it encouraged an extra-
_
The indicated address and docurnenta- entire world under the yoke of despotism, ordinary display of arrogance by Premier
tion follows: ,
- As las been aptly stated by an eminent Castro in Cuba and alarmed shipping inter-
MONROE DOCTRINE OR 1S ,
? - ... HRIiS -HCHEVIJ?O CTRINE : ' ,, ' theologian, "its cure for poverty is to in- ests that have to pay tolls.
, .. , _crease it. Its cure for oppression is to uni- In our own country, it raised questions as
Mr, PLOOD. Mr. speaker, over a laerlod Of versalize it. Its cure for injustice is to legal- the identity of the influences in the Depart-
years I have 'made many statements in the ize it. Its cure for evil is to systematize it." meat of State that led to signing the ill-
Congress concerning various ec
aspts of U.S.. , In every way, Mr. Speaker, Communist advised order and to constitutional issues of
policies in the Caribbean area. These hate parties all over the world serve as Trojan the highest importance for the future con-
included discussions of the World revolution- ..
horses, ulled with trained and disciplined duct of our foreign policy. Certainly, every
ary program for' conquest of that hemi- revolutionaries dedicated to the overthrow realistic consideration demands that the or-
spheric crossroads in which the Panamaof - -
all constitutional governments by force der to raise the Panama flag over the Canal
Canal hap Tong been a key target. and violence, with the United. States as its Zone must be disavowed.
' Certainly, a Matter kl charge-CI with serious chief and ultimate objective. For such disavowal, Mr. Speaker, recent
implications as the control of the approachesFor this aim, the conquest of the Carib-
studies by the House Committee on Foreign
to the -Panama'Canal ,'77.Iliell are ease"al-rbr bean is but the first stage in the long-range
Affairs (H. Rept. 2218, 86th Congress, Aug.
Its successful 6pera:U.6n aid: protection, can- program for encirclement of our country-- 31, 1960) supply ample justification. Fur-
mot remain unchallenged: The perspective the bastion of constitutional liberty, then reasons of more impelling character will
be found in our diplomatic history in the
afforded by prolonged stud ir and close oh-
CRISIS IN THE CARIBBEAN period immediately following World War II,
serVation has enabled me _ toprediet impor-
tant events in the Carnbean ' and to give - What is the record of the mounting crisis
of Special Political Affairs, in the Depart-
. _ when Alger Hiss was in charge of the Office
timely Warnings of them lb the ColigreSs and ' in the Caribbean? Some of its factors will
Depart-
the executive branch, including the intro- be enumerated: ment of State.
duo lion ' or measures to reaffirm and make 1. Failure and refusal by the Organization Transmitting a 1946 report of the Gov-
definite our policies. /t Le indeed r6grittable df American States to castigate Soviet Cuba ernor of the Panama Canal to the United
? that those warnings were not heeded and 'for its lawless and violent actions against Nations, this office, which is to say, Alger
Hiss, erroneously described the Canal Zone as
niecsures not adopted, but any SatElation life and property.
.... .- --
Approved Fdr Rel_aase 2007/01/2_0 P04500346R.000
Approved For Release 2007/01/20 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
-1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
"occupied territory." (Senate Int. Sec.
Subcom. hearings on "Interlocking Subver-
sion in Government Departments," pt. 19,
Max. 25 and Apr. 6, 1954, P. 1365.)
Enraging patriotic Panamanians, who op-
pose any move toward "Internationalization"
of the Panama Canal, this strange action
gave the chairman of the Panamanian dele-
gation to the United Nations an unexpected
opportunity to declare in an address to the
Political Commission of the General As-
sembly that Panama retains its sovereignty
over the Canal Zone. More important, how-
ever, is the fact that the official listing of the
zone by our Department of State as "occupied
territory" played into the hands of the Com-
munistrevolutionaries whose Ultifnate aim
since 1617 has been "internationalization."
RADICAL DEMANDS ADVANCE COLOMBIAN OCCVPA-
MN OR INTERNATiowitMATIoN
If there is any force whatsoever in the
argument for Panamanian soverignty over
the Canal Zone, it must relate back to ,the
parent Country, Colombia, from which
Panama seceded in the political develop-
ments preceding the actual building of the
Canal. It may be safely predicted that if the
United States should ever be so unmindful
and recreant of its solemn treaty obligations
for the maintenance and operation of the
Canal for the entire, world as to attempt to
transfer the Canal to Panama as a gift,
Colombia will promptly follow such action
with a reassertion of its complete sovereignty
over the entire territory of Panama and
claim the Canal as its own. Nor should it
be overlooked that Colombia has important
treaty rights with respect to the Panama
Canal and Railroad, as well as Panama.
As I have often stated and emphasized,
Panama, in its ever increasing effort to wrest
control of the canal from the United States
is not serving its own best interests, but, on
the contrary, strengthens Soviet policy and
advances the movement for the interna-
tionalization of the canal, veri the advo-
cates of these excessive Panamanian demands
declare that it would be far better for Pan-
ama to deal with the United ?States as re-
gards the operations of the canal than with
an international organization. This un-
doubtedly is true.
It is strange indeed that, though our Gov-
ernment during recent years has made many
Important concessions to the Panamanian
demands, it has never required any com-
pensating Panamanian concessions. On the
other hand, Panama has accepted the great
benefits as signals for making new and
greater demands, The latest are listed in a
'resolution of the Panamanian Assembly on
November 16, 1961, which is quoted in docu-
mentation appended to my address.
Certainly, Mr. Speaker, no revolutionary
influence in our Government, determined on
a piecemeal liquidation of our sovereign
rights, power, and authority on the Isthmus,
could have done a better job than has been
accomplished over a long period of years.
CHARLES EVANS HUGHES AND ISTHMIAN CANAL
POLICY
In this general connection, Mr. Speaker, it
is highly pertinent to consider what one of
our country's ItsbreSt and most forthright
Secretaries of State, Charles Evans Hughes,
onCe stated.
9....9.4YrPOlon with the then Minister
of Panama , 2,4he United States on Decem-
ber 15, 1923, in response to formal demands
by Panama for increased sovereignty and in-
' creased SOVereignty attributes over the canal
Zone, Mr. Hughes spoke with a refreshing de-
gree of candor and vigor. He declared that
our country "would never recede from the
position which it had taken in the note of
Secretary Hay in 1904. This Government
could not, and would not, enter into any dis-
cussion affecting its full right to deal with
the Canal Zone and, to the entire exclusion
of any sovereign rights or authority on the
part of Panama." ("Foreign Relations,"
1923, vol. III, p. 684.)
To this Secretary Hughes added that "It
was an absolute futility for the Panamanian
Government to expect any American admin-
istration, no matter what it was, any Pres-
ident or any Secretary of State, ever to sur-
render any part of these rights which the
United States had acquired under the Treaty
of 1903." That is the type of statement
that should be forthcoming from our states-
men today, especially from those in execu-
tive authority over the Canal.
On another occasion, Mr. Speaker, when
writing about the Monroe Doctrine, Mr.
Hughes made this telling statement about
Isthmian canal policies, namely:
"The construction of the Panama Canal
has not only established a new and con-
venient highway of commerce but has
created new exigencies and new conditions
of strategy and defense. It is part of Amer-
ican policy not to yield to any foreign power
the control of the Panama Canal, or the
approaches to it, or the obtaining of any
position which would interfere with the
right of protection on the part of the United
States or would menace the freedom of its
communications." (Encyclopaedia Britan-
nica, 1957, Vol. 15, p. 738).
All the exigencies foreseen by former Sec-
retary Hughes, in clear violation of the
Monroe Doctrine and our solemn tfeaty ob-
ligations with respect to the Canal, have
now come to pass. The questions that now
face us are what steps should be taken to
'protect our country against the loss of its
undoubted rights in the Caribbean and
against the chaos that will inevitably fol-
low if the United States ever abandons its
operation and control of the Panama Canal.
JOHN F. STEVENS ALERTED US TO MARXIST
DANGERS
At this point, Mr. Speaker, it is appro-
priate to examine some important historical
antecedents of the world crisis, which show
that current problems are not new, but old.
It was John F. Stevens, famed "Basic
Architect of the Panama Canal," who, while
serving as head of our railroad missions in
Russia and Siberia, 1917-23 (CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD, May 29, 1956, p. 9285) had a
unique opportunity to observe the early years
of the Russian Bolshevik revolution. He was
thus able, in his reports and during periodic
visits to Washington, to alert important
leaders in, our country, among them Ira E.
Bennett, great editor of the Washington
Post, to its internationally organized con-
spiratorial nature and the dangers thereby
involved.
Ideas about communistic subversion that
Stevens started through Editor Bennett still
reverberate.
KARL MARX FORESAW SOVIET IMPERIALISM
Before Stevens there was Karl Marx who,
from 1853 to 1856, was European correspond-
ent of the New York Daily Tribune. Among
his perceptive writings are found these star-
tling statements:
"* * * Russian imperialism * * * is not
a movement that strives for national inde-
pendence, but a movement which, directed
against Europe, would destroy all cultural
values that history has created through
thousands of years. This could not be
itehieved without eradicating Austria, Hun-
gary, Turkey, and a major part of Germany
from the (political) map."
"There is only one way of dealing with
absolute power like Russia and that is by
absolute fearlessness."
These telling words give the key to with-
stand aggressiveness: absolute fearlessness
must confront absolute power.
COMMODORE PERRY FORESAW EAST-WEST
CONFLICT
Mr. Speaker, by far the most revealing of
all the prophetic statements on the question
of East-West conflict is that of CommodOre
19095
Matthew C. Perry, after return from his
famous voyage to Japan.
Speaking before the American Geograph-
ical and Statistical Society on March 6, 1856,
he expressed views that should ring through
the centuries and I quote:
"It requires no sage to predict events so
strongly foreshadowed to us all; still `West-
ward' will `the course of empire take its way.'
But the last act of the drama is yet to be
unfolded; and notwithstanding the reason-
ing of political empirics, westward, north-
ward, and southward, to me it seems that
the people of America will, in some form or
other extend their dominion and their
power, until they shall have brought within
their mighty embrace multitudes of the
Islands of the great Pacific, and placed the
Saxon race upon the eastern shores of Asia.
And I think too, that eastward and south-
ward will her great rival in future aggran-
dizement (Russia) stretch forth per power
to the coasts of China and Siam; and thus
the Saxon and the Cossack will meet once
more, in strife or in friendship, or another
field. Will it be in friendship? I fear not.
The antagonistic exponents of freedom and
absolutism must thus meet at last, and then
will be fought that mighty battle on which
the world will look with breathless interest;
for on its issue will depend the freedom or
the slavery of the world?despotism or ra-
tional liberty must be the fate of civilized
man. I think I see in the distance the giants
that are growing up for that fierce and
final encounter; in the progress of events
that battle must sooner or later inevitably
be fought."
These words, Mr. Speaker, so meaningful
today, were uttered more than a century
ago. Surely no one who has studied world
history should be surprised at what has
happened in eastern Asia, the Southwest
Pacific, Africa, or in Cuba.
The last, being closest to our shores and
located near one of the historic invasion
routes of North America, the valley of the
Mississippi, and in a position to menace the
communications of the Panama Canal, is of
prime importance.
The domination of Cuba by a fanatical
Communist power is a clear violation of the
Monroe Doctrine and cannot be safely ig-
nored or tolerated. Cuba can serve not only
as a base from which to launch atomic
missiles against vital points in the con-
tinental United States, but also as a beach-
head from which to conduct further con-
quests through subversion. Such conquests
would occur first in remaining Caribbean
countries and later throughout Latin lands.
In this connection, Mr. Speaker it should
ever be borne in mind that Premier Khru-
shchev declared with exultation that the
Monroe Doctrine is dead. The failure to
make an adequate reaffirmation of this his-
toric policy and the succession of recent
Communist victories in the Caribbean can
only mean that the transcendent issue on
our fourth front has become the Monroe
Doctrine versus the Khrushchev doctrine.
SUBVERSIVE PERSONNEL MUST BE REMOVED
What are the explanations for the collapse
of our Caribbean policies? Of course, there
are many but basic to any sustained deterio-
ration in policy matters there is always
the question of the character of the person-
nel conducting these policies. Who were
they?
Among them were William A. Wieland,
formerly in charge of the Caribbean area
in the Department of State; Phillip Bonsal,
former U.S. Ambassador to Cuba; Herbert
L. Matthews, correspondent of the New York
Times, who was used to indoctrinate U.S.
officials on their way to Cuba and has been
widely identified as the principal architect
of the "Castro image" that enabled him to
seize power; and Roy R.. Rubottom, Jr.,
former Assistant Secretary of State for
Latin American affairs.
Approved for Release 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64130034 R000200150004-3
Approved fpr, RF 2OQ7!O2ORDP64B00346R00020015
NORESKONAI: RECORD ? HOUSE
Where are they now? Wieland is still OUR PEOPLE :ermine ACTION - If time permitted going into the early his-
being paid by the taxpayers' money and is Unfortunately, too much time has passed tory of the negotiations which led to the
now in training for a new State Department without our own Government taking proper acquisition of the Canal Zone, it could be
assignment; Bonsai is Ambassador to _action, Subversive forces in Cuba are be- shown that the United States could have
Morocco; Matthews is still with the New coming consolidated in their beachhead and -rented the required strip across the Isthmus
York Times; and, believe it or IdOt, Robottom preparing for their next moves. The well- from Colombia for construction of the
is on the staff of the Naval War College at publicized moves of our Department of State
Newport as the State Department's repre- in Dominican affairs and the Congo stands
sentative in the great insitution that trains out in stark contrast to its silence about
our naval officers in the art and science of Cuba, which is a storm center for American
war. I wonder if he also undertakes to in- subversion. In this connection, the Organ-
cioctrinate these officers .N!,lth,i-ils 9.w..4. _views ..izataarl_aa American States line been. Proved
on Castroism. , -,-..!-'' - --a- ' - -absolutely impotent.
Clearly, Mr. Speaker, so long as men Of- Indeed it is fortunate that the people of
this character are in positior s Of /Sower or our county are far ahead of our agencies of
influence with respect to the lionduct of? ourGovernment, both legislative and executive.
foreign policies, we may expeet?COnthitted
They perce lye the hazards of neglect and are
retrogression. The personnel situation pre- demanding immediate remedial action. This
sented is not one that can be corrected by a I know, not only from observations and sha-
m-Jere shifting of personnel or changing of cussions Curing my travels, but also from
Official titles under proCedures known as numerous letters from thoughtful men and
-reorganizations. It is one that c--alls for the women in various parts of the Nation.
Identification by investigating conimittees of
the Coragress, of the individuals in the De- They are also demanding remedies in line
partment of State, and the mass media who with our historic policies and the inherent
are responsible for our tragic failures in right of self-defense. They will not tolerate
supplanting the Monroe Doctrine with the
policy and their removal from positions of
- ---- -. i - - Khrusltehev Doctrine in any part of the
power. -
Regardless of whether those responsible Americas'
for these tragic failures in American foreign MONROE DOCTRINE MUST DE REAFFIRMED
, policy have been well-meaning but stupid World War II ended more than 15 years
or definitely subversive, the 7esults are the ago with the peoples of all lands, including
sal* and our Nation has suffered accord- the ,Sovlea yearning for a "lasting peace."
ingly. Such individuals shoulerbe-absehitely But instead of peace, the two strongest na-
eliminated from any position of power in tions in the world today face each other in
Our Government and public opinion should undisguised hostility. This makes it tin-
prevent their employment in =is _Media perative that our country look first to its
operations. ' "----- '---- ' ' bIlfri vital interests, for it is the only hope of
- PiniaLYses AND CONTRIVEDCGN3Mietrirrrili 'the free world to remain free.
ovERcomt ? ? - -"an the first quarter of the 19th century,
, - ,---.-- --Wheri Our country was weak, it faced a crisis
In considering the ways to mee e c al-
A.. of the gravest character. Not only was the
'lenge in the Caribbean, can we rept on tne United Slates threatened by European im-
-Drganiation of American States ror renie-
- perialism from across the Atlantic, but also
dial action? The answer Is 'TV." by Russian penetration front the Pacific
- That agency I regret to say, Is noing
' -tn Northwes-, which had reached as far south
but an instrument for paralysis. litotebver,
as Fort Ross just north of San Francisco.
'we should. not delude eur faerire pte-
:tending
the
on an organ za on o American statesmen rose to the occasion
U.' rely
ti r
-performance of tasks that we know are be- and, on December 2, 1823, President Monroe,
yond its desires, dittenti.ons, or iWnlaeri. in a message to the Congress, issued a dip-
GUATEMALA OVERCO
- - - .iiE "til44,-, ; , '.? 4ornatic.'sea_rjaing to all nations that our
xountry would resist any further conquests
S rcTEA ?
_ Mr. Speaker, in viewing the problems now in the Western Herriisphere. Monroe did not
. _lacing our country, it Should 'Be borne in wait until strategic spots in the Caribbean
mind that everywhere in rAtin countries had been occupied, but, by a forthright
-where, under a false notion of libeitV, -COM- declaration, Made our position unmistakably
-Monism has been permitted to infiltrate, and effectively clear. Such realistic treat-
traihed, and disciplined Soviet agents have merit is sorely needed today.
- Meddled In the affairs of those canaries To this end, I urge the Congress to take
:iand plotted for the overthrovi Of all legally immediate steps to correct the dangerous
LtOnetItated authority. legislative and executive delinquencies which
a , executing their designs 1'0F conquest, have diverted the conduct of our foreign
' . these agents have constantly resorted to policies from their destined course. In
, !bloody violences to attain their ends. The 1823 we were weak; today we are strong,
.. governments involved too oftefi seem to have but losing in relative strength. Why wait
'? - loecorne unnerved and.paralyzed whenfaced_ untilthe _strength ratio is further reduced?
-with the deadly peril. - ----- .':-- - _ Why wait for another Goa to demonstrate
A recent example of the Communist policy more dramatically the futility of relying for
of violent overthrow of conititufional gay- protectioa on nations which proclaim peace,
eminent was the effort on Jima 11,1061, in but practice aggression, or on an interna-
Quateraala to drive the administration of tional oaganization dominated by Soviet
President Miguel Ydigaras fibrin ridWer and controlled vetoes or votes? We must act
- to supplant it with one like' that In-Cuba, now!
'? which' is completely subservient to _orders
,
from Its Kreinlin overlords, , . - - FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION IS SOVEREIGNTY
" In contrast to what has taken' place in Mr. Speaker, underlying the Panama Canal
mune ether Latin-eotintedes; the- erectiVe're- soVereignty question is a fundamental prin-
? action of the dilater/naafi -ClaiernFrfeht- to ciple. Cur country Is in the Canal Zone
. that threat Was "highV'corrimendable and properly and lawfully, as of right, fully, and
enCouraging. ' ---- '1- ' ' '-:.?' ekplicitly defined In basic treaty agreements
Mr. Speaker, I think float i I voice the view between two sovereign states, or else it is
of _ all patriotic Americans,7tio?1i; -derittel, occupying territory to which it has no flaw-
and, South, When I "pulaliclyjor-ilie, 01's the- leas title, territory upon which its armed
90 of the House, Preildent irdigoras arid- forces and civil employees have been squat-
, itleilinistration for lEeir-ale'rtness'fb-thi ting'ainee 1904, territory for which it pays
drIngefillia for their success in aufincariting a mere rental, so that it might be permitted
ther.C.arat. They contributed to the secu- to maintain, operate, and protect the inter-
__
rity a all - Oceanic waterway.
canal, if mere leasing of the territory from
another sovereign state was what our Gov-
ernment had intended nearly 60 years ago.
It cannot be too strongly emphasized, Mr.
Speaker, that the idea of sovereign jurisdic-
tion over the Canal Zone, subject to no
limitation in time or substance, was the
prime objective of our Government.
The reason for this is the basic fact that
the United States could not afford, and was
therefore, unwilling to undertake the great
obligation to build the Panama Canal at
the expense of the American taxpayers and
to maintain and operate it in a land of
endemic revolution and political instability
except on the basis of exclusive sovereignty
in perpetuity. This consideration was fully
recognized by both Panama and the United
States in the formulation of the 1903 treaty
and any other judgment is absolutely naive
except to the extent that it may be influ-
a-need by communistic revolutionary forces.
Our obligations to the other countries in-
volved and with which we had to deal in re-
gards to the canal enterprise require that
our country have untrammeled sovereignty
and authority. A divided sovereignty would
make fulfillment of our treaty obligations to
operate the canal for world shipping on
terms of equality utterly impossible. Our
country is not a mere tenant on the isthmus
nor a squatter, but a grantee of sovereignty
in perpetuity for the perpetual maintenance,
operation and protection of the Panama
Canal.
CANAL ZONE--TARGET OF REVOLUTIONARY
AGGRESSION
In the perspective that is now possible,
the argument of Alger Hiss that under article
73 of the United Nations Charter, the United
States should file administrative reports
with the Secretary General of that organiza-
tion, because the Canal Zone is an "occupied
area," was a monstrous aggression of Com-
munistic revolutionary conspiracy upon our
valid and unblemished title to that part of
the constitutionally acquired domain of the
United States.
As was clearly foresemi by competent stu-
dents, for more than 15 years our Nation
and its Government have been harassed by
those who aim to make the flag of the United
States a symbol of imperialistic exploitation.
Some of them, unfortunately, enjoy the
status and heritage of citizenship in our
Republic.
At this point, Mr. Speaker, many have
wondered whether the 1960 Executive order
to hoist the Panama flag over the Canal
Zone was a cleverly planned move to vali-
date the 1946 declaration by Alger Hiss of
the zone as "occupied territory." To this
question the only answer is that, regardless
of the intent of its signer, the result was to
that effect, and our sovereign status has
been clouded.
At last, Mr. Speaker, the time has come for
our country to settle once and for all how it
intends that its tenure in the Canal Zone is
to be regarded by our own people, by Pan-
ama, by our other America Republic, and by
the world at large, including the Soviet em-
pire and its satellites. No bland generalities
will suffice: a categorical and unequivocal
reaffirmation that our exclusive sovereign
rights, power, and authority over the Canal
Zone and Panama Canal are not open to
challenge, and nothing less, must be pro-
claimed. For the Congress to fail in this
would be tantamount to adopting the Khru-
shchev doctrine by default.
App(oved..T9t [ease 2007'
_
..64Bla03,46R
Approved For Release 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
PLAN FOR ACTION
Mr. Speaker, as previously stated to this
body on many occasions, the conduct of
our Caribbean and ,IsthMian policies over
a 'Ong period of time has been indecisive
and lacking in consistency. Our innate
courtesy and self-restraint have been ads-
taken for weakness and the forces of sub-
version have been advanced into the vacuum
created by our own fumbling.
To meet this situation where we face
absolute power, we must show absolute fear-
lessness as the only way to meet this power.
AcCordingly, I urge the following program:
(a) Make definite and reaffirm the Monroe
Doctrine as applying to intervention through
infiltration and subversion;
(b) Make definite and reaffirm our historic
policies for exclusive sovereign control in
perpetuity over the Panama Canal and Canal
(c) Liberate the people of Cuba from alien
dictatorship and assist them in the restora-
tion of constitutional government through
free elections; and
(d) Rea,Ctivate the special service squad-
ron on a permanent basis to serve as a,
symbol of liberty.
Mr. Speaker, only [Sy such a forthright line
Of action by our Government?prompt,
courageous, and effective?can the sadly im-
paired prestige of our great country and its
leadership be restored and the cause of
Western freedom be Strengthened.
To theseends, I would appeal to the Presi-
dent of the United States when dealing with
hemispheric crises to act in the spirit of
Cleveland and Theodore Roosevelt, when they
were faced with foreign attempts to destroy
the authority and integrity of our Latin
neighbors in disregard of the Monroe
Doctrine, -
A decision thus to act may be difficult
to make; but it must be Made if the cause
of Western civilization is ,to be sustained.
In no finer way can our President in his own
right establish a profile of courage.
As partial documentation for this address
and commended for study, resolutions on
these Matters previously introduced by me
follow; also the recent exchange of letters
between the Presidents of Panama and the
United States with attendant publicity from
the Isthmian press, which lists Panamanian
aspirations,
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 225
(In the House of Representatives, 87th Cong.,
let seas., April 26, 1961)
Whereas the subversive forces known as
International communism, operating secretly
and openly, directly and indirectly, threaten
the sovereignty and political independence
of all the Western Heinisphere nations; and
- Whereas the American continents, by the
free and independent position which they
have assumed and maintained, are not sub-
ject to colonization or domination by any
power; and .
Whereas the intervention of international
communism, directly or indirectly, or how-
ever disguised, in any American state, con-
flicts with the established policy of the
American Republics for the protection of the
sovereignty of the peoples of such states and
the political independence of their govern-
ments; and ?
Whereas such a situation extended to any
portions of the Western Hemisphere is dan-
gerous to the peace and safety of the whole
of it, including the United States; Now,
therefore, be It
Resolved by the House of Representatives
(the Senate concurring), (1) That any such
subversive domination or threat of it violates
the principles of the Moriree Doctrine, and
of collective security as set forth in tile acts
and resolutions heretpfOre adopted by the
American Republics; and
(2) That in any such situation any one
or more of the high contracting parties to
the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal
Assistance may, in the exercise of individual
or collective self-defense, and in accordance
with the declarations and principles above
stated, take steps to forestall or combat in-
tervention, domination, control, and coloni-
ation in whatever form, by the subversive,
forces known as international communism
and its agencies in the Western Hemisphere.
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 33
(In the House of Representatives, 86th Cong.,
1st seas., January 9, 1959)
Whereas there is now being strongly urged
in certain quarters of the world the sur-
render, by the United States, without re-
imbursement, of the Panama Canal, to the
United Nations or to some other interna-
tional organization for the ownership and
operation of the canal; and
Whereas the United States, at the expense
of its taxpayers and under, and fully relying
on, treaty agreements, constructed the canal,
and since its completion, at large expendi-
ture, has maintained and operated it and
provided for its protection and defense; and
Whereas the United States, following the
construction of the canal, has since main-
tained, operated, and Protected it in strict
conformity with treaty requirements and
agreements, and has thus made it free, with-
out restriction or qualification, for the ship-
ping of the entire world; and, in conse-
quence of which, with respect to the canal
and the Canal Zone, every just and equitable
consideration favors the continuance of the
United States in the exercise of all the rights
and authority by treaty provided, and in the
discharge of the duties by treaty imposed:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives
(the Senate concurring), That (1) it is the
sense and judgment of the Congress that the
United States should not, in any wise, sur-
render to any other government or authority
its jurisdiction over, and control of, the
Canal Zone, and its ownership, control, man-
agement, maintenance, operation, and pro-
tection of the Panama Canal, in accordance
with existing treaty provisions; and that (2)
it is to the best interests?not only of the
United States, but, as well, of all nations and
peoples?that all the powers, duties, author-
ity, and obligations of the United States in
the premises be continued in accordance
with existing treaty provisions.
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 450
(In the House of Representatives, 86th Cong.,
Jan. 11, 1960)
Whereas, ?the United States, under the
Hay-Bunau-Varilla, Treaty of 1903 with Pan-
ama, acquired complete and exclusive sov-
ereignty over the Canal Zone in perpetuity
for construction of the Panama Canal and
its perpetual maintenance, operation, sani-
tation, and protection; and
Whereas all jurisdiction of the Republic
of Panama over the Canal Zone ceased on
exchange of ratifications of the 1903 treaty
on February 26, 1904; and
Whereas since that time the United States
has continuously exercised exclusive sover-
eignty and control over the Canal Zone and
Panama Canal; and
Whereas where responsibility is imposed
there must be given for its effectuation ade-
quate authority; and with respect to the
Panama Canal the treaty of 1903 so pro-
vided; and
Whereas the United States has fully and
effectively discharged all its treaty obliga-
tions with respect to the Pamana Canal and
the only legitimate interest that Panama
can have in the sovereignty of the Canal
Zone is One of reversionary character that
19097
can never become operative unless the Unit-
ed States should abandon the canal enter-
prises; and
Whereas the policy of the United States
since President Hayes' message to the Con-
gress on March 8, 1880, has been for an in-
teroceanic canal "under American control,"
that is to say, under the control of the
United States; and
Whereas the grant by Panama to the
United States ?of exclusive sovereignty over
the Canal Zone for the aforesaid purposes
was an abSelute; indispensable condition
precedent to the great task undertaken by
the United States in the construction and
perpetual maintenance, operation, sanita-
tion, and protection of the Panama Canal,
for the benefit of the, entire world: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives
(the Senate concurring), (1) That the Unit-
ed States, under treaty provisions, consti-
tutionally acquired, and holds, in perpetu-
ity, exclusive sovereignty and control over
the Canal Zone for the construction of the
Panama Canal and its perpetual mainte-
nance, operation, sanitation, and protection;
and
(2) That there can be no just claim by
the Republic of Panama for the exercise of
any sovereignty of whatever character over
the Canal Zone so long as the United States
discharges its duties and obligations with
respect to the canal; and
(3) That the formal display of any official
flag over the Canal Zone other than that
of the United States is violative of law,
treaty, international usage, and the historic
canal policy of the United States as fully
upheld by its highest courts and adminis-
trative officials; and would lead to confu-
sion and chaos in the administration of the
Panama Canal enterprise.
[From the Star & Herald, Panama, Republic
of Panama, Nov. 16, 1961]
TEXTS OF LETTERS
CHIARI'S
PANAMA, September 8, 1961.
To His Excellency, JOHN F. 'KENNEDY,
President of the United States of America,
The White House, Washington, D.C.
YOUR EXCELLENCY: Relations between the
Republic of Panama and the United States
of America have been governed, basically,
since 1903, by the Isthmian Canal Conven-
tion, signed in Washington on November 18
of that year, by the Secretary of State, Mr.
John Hay, and the French citizen, Phillippe
Bunau Varilla who was acting temporarily as
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipo-
tentiary of Panama.
The provisions of that Convention have
been, from the moment of its signature, and
will continue to be, as long as they remain
in force, a source of constant frictions, dis-
agreements and conflicts between the two
Governments and between the Panamanian
people and the North American population
residing in the Canal Zone.
In 1936, thanks to the dedicated efforts of
the then President of Panama, Dr. Harmodio
Arias, and his advisers, Drs, Ricardo J. Alfaro
and Narciso Garay and thanks also to the
clear understanding, ample spirit of fair-
ness and the great kindness of President
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Panama succeeded in
abolishing three rights which the 1903 Con-
vention granted to the Government of' the
United States, namely: (a) The right of in-
tervention in the internal affairs of the
Republic of Panama when in the judgment
of the United States this became necessary
to maintain order; (b) the right to occupy
any Panamanian lands or waters which in
the judgment of the United States were
necessary for the construction, maintenance,
operation, sanitation, and defense of the ea-
Approved For Release 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
_ -
Approved For 2o17to-- LRDP64B00a46R00020015C1004-
, _
19098
nal; (c) the right of "construction" of a
canal through the Isthmus of Panama.
In 1936, and again in -1942 laid 1955, Pan-
ama obtained other amendments as to detail
in the interpretation and Implementation
of certain provisions of the 1933 Convention.
But there still remain in full force the
protisions of that Convention which in prac-
tice 'have had and still have, the effect of
having divided the Republic of Panama in
two parts separated by the interpolation,
between them, of a; zone in which the Gov-
eminent of the United States 'Considers that
it has fee right of exerc[aing soVereigii
authority 'and jurisdiction, nittwitlistanding
that all of the rights -which Were grarited it
by Panama are Icrnited to the- lourPOSeri,--e-k--
pressly agreed Upon, of the "inaintenance,
operation, sanitation, and defeiii-e"-- the
,
. ,
Canal."
The real cause of all the vicea
' Of the 1903 convention lies in - that ieueh
Converiton was never negeltiated.-
rriediately following the prOclairiaticin
Panarria's independence, the Paniiiiiimitin
. representatives who were sent to negotiate
the treaty arrived in Waehington they faced
the tragic surprise that on the prevIous-day,
, just as they landed in the port Of NiVe York,
'Escretary of State John-liay and the French-
marl Sunau Varilla had hurriedly. signed the
-Itthrnian Canal C.,onverititon,
? -due negotiation, but after a quick lonifahula-
? tion between them, both,luviding over the
new, Republic of Panama,' bound harid- -and
feet, to the mercy of the GoVernifiefit of the
?'United States, in perpetuity, self there could
be perpatual human things.
- For these reasons, the Istliinian Conven-
tion' of 1903 carries within le-the causes of
its own extinction.
It is riot necessary fin% irie to go into
details im the manlier in Will-eh that Wholly
?-unfair ,convention was drafted and signed-,
, because the turn of this century saw the
peak of the colonialist i3xpansion Of strong
states to the detriment of nations rendered
weak by the ignorance and subrniisiOn of the
popular masses. At that thee; no Voice Was
-raised in support of countries subjected by,
' brute -force or by imsurintrantable causes
to the domination of a :Powerful State.
After half a century And iVeo AleOrId WfirS,
the panorama is wholly "different: Colonies
, are ' on their way out, respect for the per-
sonality of each state is nbw an exiornin
international law, the principle of noninter-
vention in the internal affairs-Er another
state has victoriously surged' forward, and
the' structure of the worldOrganization% Of
.
nations is showing ever More effectively,
the, influence of united: small nations on
international problems and conflicts.
There is no place in the mentality of man
In this second half of the 23-th century or
. the proposition that a state, no Matter how
strong, can exert sovereign rights over any
part of the territory or another state, no
,
matter how small or weak. -
This does not mean, however, that two
sovereign and independent states having
common interests cannct reach understand-
inge which, without being -detriinenteil -16
the sovereignty and the dignity Of either
one, enable both to defend and protect their
fair interest' and rights without dieregarding
or damaging the fair interests -and 'rights
of the other. '"
It was for these reason's thaf-,----Tif-the ade
of the indissohible-coMiriutitredliitereete-
between- Panama atict tire Velited StalieS;- in
the face of the increa,s1hglY urgent need for
- establishing and mairitainhWrecipiocal-reld-'
tions on a basis of sincere frieTidslific--,irlifu?
eet, and well-recfpreicated conSideratiOn;
I n the face of the ,permaiterit"source-of
filsoord. Which is the 1603 convention, that
-
I took the liberty, of forwarding' to 3iCal,'
through ybilf P-erSonaI representative at the
. Conference - Foreign Ministers and Eebn-
()My held in 'I'excIgallia ;.n Jiffy of this
'IT-0-RESS IONA'. RECORD ? MUSE
year, my personal message suggesting how
convenient and necessary it is for Panama
and the United States to converse without
prejudice, without resentment, setting aside
past problems and offenses, as nations sin-
cerely friendly and sincerely determined to
search for fair solutions, to analyze and dis-
cuss their present-day relations in the light
of the doctrines which now govern the world,
with a view to attaining permanent under-
standings, on just bases, which will assure to
each party the attainment and enjoyment of
what in justice and fairness is due each one,
withOut a prior agenda, so that each may
openly place the cards it wants on the table.
I have the deep personal conviction that
rf Panama and the United States were to
Cast aside the interminable and up to now
almost fruitless discussions on what should
be the correct interpretation of existing
treaties, and -cl*osed themselves to under-
take the analysis of existing relations be-
tween- both with a realistic approach and
in the lig it of the principles and norms of
international law, already universally rec-
ognized, they will find adequate formulae
to resolve, once and for all and for all time,
a stable and lasting association which will
enable them to carry out harmoniously the
common destiny set out for them by the
Panama Canal. The bias?whether justi-
fied or unjustified?that such results are
either difficult or impossible of attainment,
should nct be an obstacle for the attempt.
The Alliance for Progress you have so
wisely proposed, which was set in motion in
Montevideo with the cooperation of all the
American nations, could find no better reali-
zation in the relations between Panama and
the United States through a formula that
Neill place these relations on a level of clear
and just understandings permitting Panama
a fuller use of its economic potential, with-
out diminishing the consideration that is
due to the interests of the United States by
reason of the canal enterprise made possible
by both countries and in whose operation
both have a common interest.
It is a source of real pleasure for me to
reiterate on this occasion the sentiments of
my highest consideration and great appre-
ciation.
HOBERTO P. CHIARI,
President of the Republic of Panama.
---
KENNEDY'S
THE WHITE HOUSE,
November 2, 1961.
DEAR M. PRESIDENT: I have read with
great intsrest your letter of September 8,
1961, which your brother delivered to me on
September 15. I am also very pleased to
have had a personal conversation with your
brother at that time.
I agree with you that an unusual com-
munity of interests exists between the Re-
public of Panama and the United States,
Our respective Governments and peoples
have been closely associated since the very
beginning of your nation. The Panama
Canal has been an-important element in
the development and growth of the relation-
ship between our two countries, and has
also contributed to the bonds of unity which
link all the American Republics.'
The C overnment of the United States
hopes to maintain and strengthen the rela-
tions between our two nations on the basis? '
Of mutual respect and sincere friendship. t
feel sure that the Government of Panama
shares ttis objective.
Once again on behalf of the Government
of the United States, I reaffirm our willing-
ness to aooperate wholeheartedly with the
Government of Panama to insure the full
enjoyment of the various benefits which the
canal should afford to the two nations that
'Made possible fts construction. We also wish
to make these benefits available to all na-
tions interested in international trade,
As I pointed out to your brother on Sep-
September 2a
tember 15, / reallee that the historic friend-
ship and cooperation between our two
countries has sometimes been marred by dif-
ferences concerning the interpretation of the
rights granted to the United States by the
Republic of Panama. In past years these
problems have been resolved in various
ways?sometimes through formal treaty
negotiations and sometimes through friendly
discussions and the subsequent implemen-
tation of specific measures agreed upon by
representatives of the two Governments.
My Government recognizes that differences
will inevitably arise between even the
friendliest nations, and believes that these
differences must be discussed thoroughly
and frankly, in order to clarify the interests
and attitudes of both parties. It seems clear
therefore, that when two friendly nations
are bound by treaty provisions which are not
fully satisfactory to one of the parties, ar-
rangements should be made to permit quali-
fied representatives of both nations to dis-
cuss these points of dissatisfaction with a
view to their resolution.
I have instructed the various responsible
departments and agencies of the U.S. Gov-
'ernment to make a complete reexamination
of our current and future needs with respect
to Isthmian Canal facilities. I expect this
study to be completed within a very few
months, at which time my Government will
communicate promptly with the Govern-
ment of Panama. I am confident that repre-
sentatives of our two Governments, after a
frank exchange of views and a careful as-
sessment of our mutual needs and interests,
can reach fruitful conclusions which will pro-
mote the mutual welfare of both countries.
With cordial good wishes,
Sincerely,
JOHN F. KENNEDY.
[From the Panama Star & Herald, Nov. 16,
1961]
KENNEDY AGREES ON NEED FOR RP TALKS---
NEGOTIATIONS APPEAR ASSURED DURING
1962
President John F. Kennedy has agreed with
President Roberto F. Chiari that differences
between their two nations must be discussed
thoroughly and frankly. In a reply to the
Panamanian Chief Executive, Kennedy an-
nounced he has called for a complete re-
examination of U.S. current and future needs
with respect to Isthmian Canal facilities
prior to entering into negotiations with
Panama.
"I expect this study to be completed within
a very few months, at which time my Gov-
ernment will communicate promptly with
the Government of Panama," Kennedy wrote
Chiari. "I` am confident that representa-
tives of our two Governments after a frank
exchange of views and a careful assessment
of our mutual needs and interests, can reach
fruitful conclusions which will promote the
mutual welfare of both countries."
Thus, new negotiations over U.S. rights in
the Canal Zone and Panamanian benefits
from the Isthmian Waterway appeared as-
sured for 1962.
President Kennedy answered the Pana-
manian President's letter of September 8,
calling, in effect, for negotiations from
scratch.
"I have the deep personal conviction,"
Chiani had written ltennedy, that if Panama
And the United States were to cast aside the
interminable and up-to-now almost fruitless
discussions on what should be the correct in-
terpretation of existing treaties, and dis-
posed themselves to undertake the analysis
of existing relations between both with a
realistic approach and in the light of the
principles and norms of international law,
already universally recognized, they will find
adequate formulate to resolve, once and for
all for all time, a stable and lasting associa-
tion which will enable them to carry out
Approv _For?Retease 2007/01/211:-
R-RDE64B00345_13_000200.150004-
1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?HOUSE
harmoniously the common destiny set out
for them by the Panama Canal." .
And he added: "The bias--Whether justi-
fied or unjustified?that such results are
either difficult or impossible of attainment,
should not be an obstacle for the attempt."
Chiari's letter wae hand delivered to Pres-
ident Kennedy at the White Rouse on Sep-
tember 15 by his brother, Richarelo Chiari.
Kennedy's letter was hand delivered to Pres-
ident Chiari 4 the Presidenela by Phillip
Clock, Acting Charge d'Affairs of the United
States in Panama, Tuesday afternoon.
Announcement of the text. of the Presi-
dential correspondence was made simulta-
neously yesterday afternoon in Washington
and Panama City.
Press Secretary Fabian Velarde, Jr., dis-
tributed copies of both letters to newsmen at
4:30 p.m., at the Peesid,encia. In answer to
a question, he said President Chiari is Pleased
by the answer he has received from Presi-
dent Kennedy. He declared that Panama
most likely will continue the appraisal of
its position during the time that the United
States takes for the study of its current
and future canal needs. .
Velarde also said that the. Panama Gov-
ernment will appoint its negotiators soon
and they will work closely with the National
Council of Foreign Relations in the presenta-
tion of Panama's claims.
When a newsman raised the point that
the time mentioned in President Kennedy's
letter for the U.S. study of its canal needs
might be 1 or 2 years, Velarde pointed to
the phrase "within a very few months" and.
added that while every one was entitled to
his own interpretation, he thought this
means less than 6 months.
Chiari's letter revealed that the Panama-
nian President made his first approach to
Kennedy on the subject of new negotiations
as far back as July. At that time an emis-
sary of President Chiari met with the per-
sonal representative of President Kennedy at
a meeting of Central American Foreign Min-
isters held in Tegucipalga, Honduras. This
was followed by the September letter.
The Panamanian Chief Executive made one
major point in his personal letter to Ken-
nedy?that the 1903 treaty, which has gov-
erned basically, relations between the two
countries since Panama became independent
was not negotiated by Panamanian repre-
sentatives, but was hurriedly signed (by a
quick confabulation) between the Secretary
of State of the United States John Hay, and
Philippe Bunar Varilla, a.Frenehman, tempo-
rarily acting as Panama's envoy. Chiari
pointed out that this was done at the "peak
of the colonialist expansion of strong states."
But times have changed, Chiari said, in
effect.
"After a half century and two World
Wars," he wrote President Kennedy, "the
panorama is wholly different: Colonies are
on their way out, respect for the personality
of each state is now an axiom in internation-
al law; the principle of nonintervention in
the internal affairs of another state has vic-
toriously urged forward, and the structure
of the world erganization of nations is show-
ing, ever more effectively, tlie influence of
united small nations on international prob-
lems and conflicts."
Approved
F.or Rel9aSe 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
And with a pointed reference to the key
question between Panama and the United
States?sovereignty over the Canal Zone?
the President of Panama added:
"There's no place in the mentality of man
in this second half of the 20th century for
the PrelboAlwx4.0.4tp, gate, no matter how
strong, can &rah" sovereign rights over any
part of the territory of another state, no
matter how small or weak."
? .
No. 170-28
But, he went on, there is nothing to pre
vent two sovereign and independent states
from reaching understandings providing ac-
ceptable arrangement for the fair interests
and rights of each.
President Kennedy's letter matched the
cordial tone of President Chiari's approach
"Once again," Kennedy wrote, "on behalf
of the Government of the United States, I
reaffirm our willingness to cooperate whole-
heartedly with the Government of Panama
to insure the full enjoyment of the various
benefits which the canal should afford to the
two nations that made.possible its construc-
tion. We also wish to make these benefits
available to all nations interested in inter-
national trade."
He added: "My Government recognizes
tript differences will inevitably arise between
even the friendliest nations and believes that
these differences must be discussed thor-
oughly and frankly in order to clarify the
interests and attitudes of both parties. It
seems clear, therefore, that when two friend-
ly nations are bound by treaty provisions
which are not fully satisfactory to one of the
parties, arrangements should be made to per-
mit qualified representatives of both nations
to discuss these points of dissatisfaction with
a view to their resolution."
There has been no official announcement
by Panama of what specific issues it proposes
to raise when normal negotiations are under-
taken. But an official listing of unfulfilled
Panamanian demands in previous negotia-
tions carried in the Foreign Office's 1961 re-
port to the National Assembly included these
major points:
1. The display of the Panamanian flag in
the Canal Zone,
2. Implementation of the principle of
equality of wages, of treatment, and of op-
portunity for employment among Panaman-
ian and North American citizens in the
Canal Zone.
3. Increase of the canal annuity to 20 per-
cent of the gross revenue with a guaranteed
minimum of $5 million. The present annu-
ity is $1,930,000.
4. Cessation of grant in perpetuity.
5. Mixed courts in the Canal Zone.
[From the Panama (Republic of Panama)
Star & Herald, Nov. 17, 1961]
REPUBLIC OF PANAMA ASSEMBLY CALLS FOR
BRANDNEW TREATY?DEPUTIES FAVOR SCRAP-
PING OF PREVIOUS PACTS?RESOLUTION, AP-.
PROVED UNANIMOUSLY, ADVOCATES TREATY
REAFFIRMING REPUBLIC OF PANAMA SOVER-
EIGNTY IN ZONE
The Panama National Assembly went on
record yesterday for the scrapping of all
previous treaties with the United States and
for a new treaty reaffirming Panamanian sov-
ereignty in the Canal Zone.
The resolution, introduced by nationalist
leader, Aquilino Boyd, in behalf of himself
and 11 other assembly deputies, was ap-
proved unanimously after a brief discussion.
In addition to the sovereignty demand,
the assembzly listed 13 other points as mini-
mumi aspirations of the Panamanian people.
TheSe points are almost identical to the list
of Panamanian demands not met by the
United States in previous negotiations, is-
sued earlier this month by the Foreign Office.
The assembly acted within 24 hours of the
release of the text of the correspondence
between Presidents Roberto Chiari and John
F. Kennedy on the subject of new treaty
negotiations. President Chiari, in a letter
dated September 8, told President Kennedy
that the two countries should make another
attempt at resolving their longstanding dif-
ferences, starting this time from scratch.
President Kennedy, in a letter dated Novem-
ber 2, agreed that such differences must be
discussed thoroughly and frankly, and in-
dicated that the United States will be ready
to enter into talks in 1962 after a reexami-
nation of its current and future needs with
respect to Isthmian Canal facilities.
The assembly said yesterday that Kenne-
dy's letter "evidences the good will of his
Government to arrive at satisfactory agree-
ments on the questions deriving from the
Interoceanic Canal embedded in our ter-
ritory."
The resolution also pointed out; That the
1903, 1936, and 1955 treaties have not suc-
ceeded in "cementing the relations between
the two countries in a satisfactory manner."
That the 1903 treaty is manifestly unfair
and that the grant is made to the United.
States in perpetuity is not in keeping with
the principles of international law.
That Panama is not deriving fair benefits
from the Panama Canal.
The resolution provides as follows:
"Be it resolved?
"1. That (the assembly) express its most
fervent desire that-the 1903 Treaty on the
Interoceanic Canal arid the treaties subse-
quently entered into in 1936 and 1935 be
totally replaced and that a new treaty be
drawn up which will reaffirm Panamanian
sovereignty in the Canal Zone and satisfy
the minimum aspirations of the Panama-
nian people.
"2. That the following are recognized as
the minimum aspirations of the Panama-
nian people:
(a) Elimination of the in-perpetuity
clause and reversion to Panama of the canal
installations on a fixed term.
"(b) Fair sharing of the canal revenues
(the Foreign Office had listed increasing the
canal annuity from the present $1,930,000 to
20 percent of the gross revenue, with a guar-
anteed minimum of $5 million).
"(e) Establishment of mixed courts and
revision of the present legislation in the
Canal Zone.
"(d) Recognition of Spanish as an official
language in the Canal Zone.
"(e) Cooperation by Canal Zone authori-
ties to enforce Panamanian laws in the
Canal Zone.
"(f) Establishment of Panamanian juris-
diction over the poets of Balboa and Cris-
tobal.
"(g) Raising of the Panamanian flag on all
public buildings and on all ships transiting
the canal.
"(h) Use of Panamanian postage stamps
in the Canal Zone.
"(i) Elimination of the issuance of ex-
equaturs (written official recognition) by
the Canal Zone to foreign consuls.
"(j) Effective equality of opportunity and
treatment for Panamanian and. North Amer-
ican workers in the Canal Zone.
"(k) Inclusion of a clause on arbitration
as the means of resolving controversies.
(The Foreign Office has listed acceptance of
the mandatory jurisdiction of the World
Court over controversies between the two
countries.> -
"(1) Cooperation by the U.S. Government
for the defense of the Panamanian civil pop-
ulation against possible nuclear attacks.
"(m) Regulation of commercial activities
in the Canal Zone through a treaty of com-
merce, bearing in mind at all times the ob-
jective of insuring for Panama the full en-
joyment of all types of benefits deriving
from the operation of the canal."
Cosignators of the resolution with Boyd
were Deputies Azael Vargas, Thelma King,
Jos?gustin Arango, Enrique Jimenez, Jr.,
Jacinto Lopez y Ledn, Jorge Fernandez, Sid-
ney Wise Arias, Rafael Grajales, Juan B.
Arias, Rani Arango, Jr., and Demetrio
Oecerega.
19099
Approved For Release 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
Approved For-ft-la-le-as 200-7101126: CIA-ROP64B00346RG002C1015000473
19100
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
September RO
INTERLOCKING SUBVERSION IN GOVERNMI. 1 Mr. BRADEN. r had all reports d Exactly.
U.S. SENATE', SusicoVivarrEE To IN- init. The Army had the same thing. The
DEPARTNENTSd ' telegrams, everything coming in from Pana-
VESTIGATE THE ADMINISTRATION newspapers carried it.
OP THE INTERNAI: SECURITY ACT Mr. Gairms, But your knowledge is based
' AND OTHER INTERNAL SECURITY on the official reports made to you as Assist-
LAWS, 'OF THE CbmserrrEt ON - ant Secretary of State in charge of Latin
EHE Surnor.ARY, - - - - American affairs; is that correct?
Washington, D.C., March 25, 1954. Mr. BRADEN. Exactly.
The subcomfnittee niet it 10 a.m., pur- Mr. GRIMES. That is the position you oc-
suant to call, in room 324, Senate Office cupied, then?
Building, Senator William U. Jenner (chair- Mr. Be ADEN. That is the position.
man) presiding. ' - _. - Mr. GRIMES. Will you state, please, what
Present: Senators Jenner, Watkins, Welker, the Russian Communist Party line was? I
and Butler. , think I interrupted you.
Also present: Charles P. Grimes, chief Mr. BEADEN. I was going to say that for the
counsel; 3. G. Sourwine, associate counsel; first tin' e the Russians at that time at that
Benjamin Mandel, director Of research; Dr. Assembly in New York, made the attack on
Edna R. Fluegel and Robert C. McManus, us that we had aggressive intentions--that
professional staff members, we were aggressive and the proof of the ag-
The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come gressive intentions we had was our establish-
to ore.er. - 1-= -i - ing bases all over the world.
_
'Let the record show this is a continuation Mr. GRIMES. Did they at that time mention
of a hearing With Ambassador Braden that Pananns bases?
was started December 22, 1953, in New York, Mr. BRADEN. Subsequently during the dis-
and I will ask Mr. Grimes- to connect the cussions in the Assembly they did, not at
two and to clarify the record. the beg nning, as I recall.
M. GRIMES. Thank yott. I-think that Mr. GRIMES. So they used the Panama
VVOUld make a: more orderly record. bases as proof of our aggressive intentions?
t here will be some repe?Ation, but simply Mr. BRADEN. Well, you say they used it.
by way of amplification. ' - - We gays them the ammunition.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Witness, do you swear Mr. GRIMES. Let's get to that later, but
the testimony you will give will be the truth, that was the party line?
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, Mr. BRADEN. Sure.
so help you God? Mr. GRIMES. We were the aggressors. The
-
Mr. BRADEN. So help me God, I do. proof is we have the bases, the military bases,
TESTBAONY or Srrivrts,r rethrrisr, '-xs's* toftie, all over the world, including Panama; is that
-
right? .
' ? - -, -,' Mr. BRADEN. As I recall, the Russians made
. _ . , the point specifying Panama later. "EXHIBIT NO. 357?CHARTER OF THE UNITED
The CHAIRMAN. State yStefull name.
. ? ? , The CHAIRMAN. They were not referring to NATIONS?CHAPTER XI, DECLARATION REGARD-
MI YdRADEN Spruille Braden and I live in
New York, 320 East 72d Street.
. the Canal Zone, they were referring to the INC NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES
prcifession? "Article 73
Repub' ic of Panama, 134 bases?
The CHAIRMAN. What H your business or
Mr. .3RADEN. Yes, the 134 bases I am talk-
Mr. BRADEN. Presently as a c011aultant to ing about. But the Canal Zone was brought "Members of the United Nations which
various firms mostly on foreign investments in implicitly, have or assume responsibilities for the ad-
and partietilarly in Latin America. Mr. Gramts. Did you have an experience in ministration of territories whose people have
The CHAIRMAN.. When were you with the connection with the agitation in Panama and not yet attained a full measure of self-gov-
Oovernment Of the 'United' States?. the -Communist Party line with Alger Hiss? ernment recognize the principle that the
Mr. I3RADEN. / Was with the Government Mr. 3RADEN. Yes, interests of the inhabitants of these tern-
+Re United States more -Or less contin- Mr. GRIMES. What was it?
instances. tories are paramount, and accept as a sacred
trust the obligation to promote to the ut-
r.
Mr. GRIMES. He had been submitting it to
the American Government; is that right?
Mr. BRADEN. Since 1903, I assume.
Mr. GRIMES. Go ahead, please. What hap-
pened in connection with that report?
Mr. BRADEN. My office, represented by Mr.
Cochran, Mr. William Cochran, who was in
charge of that whole area in the 'Caribbean,
and Mr. Wise, who was on the Panama desk,
became involved in an argument with the
Office of Political Affairs, because the latter
wished to submit this report by the Gover-
nor of the Canal Zone to the United Nations.
My officers immediately got in touch with
the legal adviser's office where Miss Ann
O'Neill, a very competent lawyer, and a very
sturdy soul, I may say?I have a great ad-
miration for her?supported the thesis of
my officers that under no circumstances
should this report of the Governor of the
Canal Zone be submitted to the United
Nations.
Finally, Mr. Hiss himself?
Mr. GRIMES. What was your reason for
that?
Mr. BRADEN. I was going to say what Hiss'
reason was first, because I think that makes
it clearer.
Alger Hiss and his office claimed under
article 73(e) of the United Nations Charter,
it was our obligation to submit that report.
I don't know whether you would like to have
article 73 reviewed now, or not.
The CHAIRMAN. Let it go into the record
and become a part of the record, without
reading.
(The material referred to was marked
"Exhibit No. 357" and is as follows:)
nottsly?there Were in t..10 first couple of
Years a few intermissions?from the end of
1933 until June 28, L917.
' The CHAIRMAN. In what" capacities did you
serve? ? -r.-
tRADEN. I began firSt as delegate in
charge of all the eeofferilic and financial
discussions of the Seventh International
emnference. .
Yes. Going back to 1941, when I was in
Colombia, I began soundirig warnings to the
'state Department about -he Menace of com-
nittnism in this hemisphere and during the
vg-194S and 1944-th.ere were -repeated
.dispiatehes in which said that this is the
? girveat peril we face and that after the war
, it_is going to be most serious.
The CHAIRMAN. That was in your written
reports.
Mr. BRADEN. Writt?Bn reports and telegrams,
all kinds of things. - ?
15r. Ofiimels. hat was the ttuss an Com-
munist Party fine at illat time?
Mr. BriAniN. ore.' or fess shnufteneously
; with that, had the etienIng` that fall of
the first United- Nations Assembly meeting
'1.t" Thi; had a San Francisco
Mr. GRIMES. What was Hiss doing at that most, within. the system of international
Mr. BRADEN. There were two
time? peace and security established by the pres-
Mr. BRADEN. Hiss was in charge of the ant Charter, the well-being of the inhabi-
Office of Special Political Affairs. tants of these territories, and, to this end:
Mr. GRIMES. In the State Department? "a, to ensure, with due respect for the
Mr. BRADEN. In the State Department. culture of the peoples concerned, their polit-
That office today is headed by an Assistant ical, economic, social, and educational ad-
Secretory of State. It is the office for United vancement, their just treatment, and their
Nations affairs. He was the head of that protection against abuses:
office, although he did not have the rank of "b. to develop self-government, to take due
Assistarlt Secretary of State. account of the political aspirations of the
The first thing that happened was that,
peoples, and to assist them in the progres-
in the routine performance of his duties, the sive development of their free political in-
Govex nor of the Canal Zone submitted his stitutions, according to the particular cir
annual report. -
cumstances of each territory and its peoples
Mr. GRIMES. To whom? and their varying stages of advancement;
Mr. BRADEN. On the operations of the "c. to further international peace and se-
Canal Zone. I think that is submitted to curity;
d. to promote constructive measures of
'
the War Department. I am not sure of that, '
but n any case, it was published, as it
development, to encourage research, and to
:
cooperate with one another and, when and
usually is. where appropriate, with specialized interna-
Mr GRIMES. You say routine operations.
Would you describe it, briefly, please?
tional bodies with a view to the practical Mr. BRADEN. I can't do a good job of de-
achievement of the social, economic, and
scientific purposes set forth in this article;
scrib rig it. I don't think I read it. and
Mr. GRIMES. What sort of report was it? 'e. to transmit regularly to the Secretary
Mr BRADEN. How many boats are going '
General for information purposes, subject
nueting and a London-meeting, but here
the Assembly met in New York for the first to such limitation as security and consti-
. . , , through the canal. in different directions, the
tirae. tutional considerations may require, statis-
tical ? ,? ....., . , ....._,. , , ., tonnage, et cetera, what were the operations
Mr. GRIMES. they were' Maoist to Meet at operation everything, tical and other information of a technical
- - - ?? - Meet at the afcires Sri the canal, what was the labor
4e't took place'? Mr. ?RINSES. Population, matters of that nature relating to economic, social, and edu-
ime this
,"tRADEN. This all took' place after V-J sort? cational conditions in the territories for
Day: AngliSt 6 Or Auguss 7, Mr. BRADEN. I think population was prob- which they are respectively responsible other
than those territories to which chapters XII
- Mr. ORImEg. The agitation began? ably in it. I don't recall. and XIII apply." .
Mr. BRAD EN. egan arofftptly and it grew Mr; GRIMES. This is a report by our Gover- Mr. BRADEN. My officers maintained that
rapidly in voluine. nor down there on operations in the Canal was perfectly ridiculous; that article '73(e)
:.,Mr. GRTMis. You "kn(V this through re- Zone and a report which he submits an- anticipated self-government. That was the
ports that reached yeti? ' nually; is that correct? phraseology used in it.
Approv_ a?e-C1C0
19,62
The Canal Zone, so far as the Republic
of Panama it concerned, is self-governing.
We had a special agreement as to the op-
eration of the Canal Zone. There was no
rhyme or reason, in my opinion, nor in the
opinion of my officers, why that should be
presented to the United Nations.
Moreover, we "knew that if it were pre-
sented that it was just going to enrage the
Panamanians. It was going to play into
the hands of the Russians with their alle-
gations about our bases scattered elf over
the world, and particularly in Panama.
It was going to alienate a lot of the other
Latin Americans, who would Say, "See what
the United States is doing in the Canal
Zone?"
It was a thoroughly bad move to make
and particularly with the 'Assembly starting
up in New York.
I knew that Mr. Alfaro, the former Presi-
dent of Panama, and Minister of Foreign
Relations, a leading politician, already faced
this terrific problem about the bases outside
of the zone, and would be terrifically an-
noyed by this report being presented.
Mr. GRIMES. In addition, would it com-
plicate our relations insofar as operation is
concerned by giving the United Nations a
voice? '
Mr. BRADEN. It would complicate us with
the Republic of Panama. It brought the
United Nations into something where they
had no right to be.
Mr. GRIMES. It might give them a claim
to some stake in the operation of the Pan-
ama Canal?
MT. BRADEN. Exactly.
Mr. GRIMES. Was that part of the a gu-
ment?
MT. BRADEN. Absolutely.
The CHAIRMAN. Senator WATKINS.
Senator WATHINs. IS it not true we also
made reports on Alaska?
Mr. 13RAaRN. That was not in my sphere, so
I haven't any idea about that. I think we
did. I don't know whether we did on Ha-
waii or not, but I think we did, now that you
mention it. But I wasn't concerned about
that. I had enough troubles of my own with
Panama.
Senator WATKINS. The reason I call your
attention to it was the fact I entered a
protest about reporting from Alaska.
Mr. BRADEN. I vaguely remember that was
true.
Senator WELKER. Mr. Chairman, May" I
have a question?
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Welker.
Senator WELKER. Mr. Ambassador, you
were fortified by your counsel's opinion and
the opinion of yourself and others, that you
were permitted not to submit this informa-
tion as requested by Mr. Hiss under the
limitation of security; is that correct? That
is Subsection (e) of article 73.
Mr. BRAnrN. That I can't give you an opin-
ion on as a lawyer. I know that the proce-
dure was totally out of order. There was no
justification for that; aside from all of the
Issues that counsel has brought up in re-
gard to our relations.
Senator WELKER. Not withstanding the
fact that you did have the security defense
in mind, it was still insisted 'by Mr. Hiss?
?Tgtr. BRADEN. It was still insisted by Mr.
Hiss that it had to be submitted to the
United Nations.
Finally, Mr. Cochran and Mr. Murray Wise,
my assistants on this matter, came to me
and said, "You have got to enter this fight.
We can't get any further on it
M that point we got Mr. Hackworth, the
legal adviser to the Stale Departinent, in on
it.
My boys reported to- me they were quite
concerned. They feared Mr. Hackworth was
veering over to the side of Alger Hiss, but I
stormed around quite a bit on this problem
and finally Mr. Hackworth would not give
a decision.
Approved For Release 2007/01/20: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE 19101
Mr. ORimts. Did another incident take
place in regard to Panama?
Mr. GRIMES. What was that?
Mr. BRADEN. At that time, and you have
to get the picture of the United Nations, the
Russians making their speeches about our
being aggressors, and the proof being the
bases, the Panama bases, 131 outside of Pan-
ama Canal Zone, being brought in as proof
positive of our aggressive intentions, and I
desperately trying and praying that I would
be able to keep the lid on everything until
the Assembly was over in New York.
And that we could get Mr. Alfard down to
Washington, and quietly and calmly, in
luncheons, and in our offices, work out an
agreement with him about these 134 bases
which the military informed me were vi-
tally necessary for the security of the Pan-
ama Canal?therefore, of the United States.
You can, therefore, imagine my utter as-
tonishment when one morning I picked up
the Washington Post at my apartment and
here on the front page was an announcement
that we had reported to the United Nations
on the Canal Zone as an occupied territory.
When I read that, I realized that was really
putting the "fat in the fire" in our relations
with Panama in the substantiation of the
Russian allegations and in our relations with
all of the American Republics; it was such
a nasty situation.
Mr. GRIMES. In other words, our State De-
partment had officially reported it to the
U.N., that Panama was one of our occupied
territories?
Mr. BRADEN. Yes. The only thing, my
memory is a little hazy on whether that
came along at about the same time as the
submission of the report by the Governor, or
whether it came subsequently, but my best
recollection is it came subsequently.
Mr. GRIMES. This was a matter under your
jurisdiction as Assistant Secretary of State
for Latin American Affairs?
MT. BRADEN. Exactly.
Mr. GRIMES You learned about it for the
first time in the newspapers?
Mr. BRADEN. I learned about it for the first
time in the newspapers.
Mr. GRIMES. What did you do?
Mr. BRADEN. I dropped the newspaper, and
I tore down to the State Department. I
called in the Director of the Office of Ameri-
can Republics Affairs, Mr. Briggs, who pres-
ently is our American Ambassador in Korea;
and my first special assistant, Mr. Wright;
and Mr. Murray Wise was then called in as
the officer on the Panamanian desk.
I may say I was using some pretty strong
language around the place at this outrage.
None of them knew any more about it
than I.
They also had read it in the newspapers.
We then tried to run it down, and we
found that this report had been submitted
and the employment of the words "occupied
territory" by the Office of Special Political
Affairs, that is to say, Mr. Alger Hiss.
At that point it was appealed to the Under
Secretary of State.
The CHAIRMAN, Who was that?
Mr. BRADEN. Mr. Acheson.
I remember very vividly that I went in to
see Mr. Acheson. I think Mr. Hiss had al-
ready been there for some time.
This was all 7 years ago, so my memory'
may be a bit off, but I think it is substan-
tially accurate.
When I tried to state my case, Mr. Acheson,
as a lawyer, agreed with Mr. Hiss, and I didn't
even have a chance to state my case. I
remember that I came out of that meeting
boiling with rage at what happened.
Senator WELKER. Mr. Hiss was present
there?
Mr. BRADEN. Oh, yes. The only thing we
got out of Mr. Hiss' office was an expression
which today I don't understand very clearly.
and he said this?he put in a phrase that
this Was submitted to the United Nations,
this report of the Governor, on a pragmatic
basis for this year, for the year 1946. What
that means, I don't know, but that was sup-
posed to take care of our objections, which
needless to say, it did not.
As we predicted, the Panamanian 'Foreign
Minister made a speeech in the United
Nations. I have a copy of this if you wish
to have it in the record.
The CHAIRMAN. I think it should go into
the record and become a part of the record.
(The material referred to -was marked
"Exhibit No. 358" and is as follows:)
"ERHIBIT NO. 358?PANAMA CANAL ZONE IS NOT
LEASED TERRITORY
"(Dr. Ricardo J. Alfaro Explains Payment of
$430,000 Annuity by the U.S. Govern-
ment)
"(Speech by the president of the Pana-
manian delegation, Dr. Ricardo J. Alfaro,
during the session of the Political Commis-
sion of the General Assembly of the United
Nations on November 14, 1946, in respect to
the international status of the Panama
Canal Zone.)
"The Panamanian Delegation has been in-
formed that by virtue of a resolution adopted
on February 9, 1946, by the United Nations
Assembly, the United States has presented
a eeport concerning the territories under its
administration and has included the Pan-
ama Canal Zone among those about which
It had to report to the General Secretariat,
in accordance with article 73(e) of the
United Nations Charter."
? ? I ?
Mr. GRIMES. Would you state what his
points were?
Mr. BRADEN. The substance was that here
we were talking about the canal as if we
had it under lease, and we did not; that it
was a special agreement beginning in 1903
between Panama and the United States; that
Panama had given the United States certain
facilities ana we had in return made certain
payments in regard to?/ think it was $10
million to Panama, plus an annual rental of
6250,000 a year.
Subsequently we went off gold, raised it to
$430,000 a year.
There were the various quid pro quos back
and forth that the submission of this to
the United Nations was an outrage both to
Panama and to the agreement.
lfr. GRIMES. In other words, it was none
of the business of the United Nations that he
came out very much on the side of the
United States on this?
Mr. BRADEN. He came out very much on
the side oh nay office, not of the United States,
because we had submitted it.
Mr. GRIMES. That depends on what the
U. interest is.
Mr. BRADEN. Of the true interest of the
United States, yes.
Mr. GRIMES. The report was then submit-
ted to the United Nations?
Mr. BRADEN. Yes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Florida [Mr. ROGERS] is rec-
ognized for 30 minutes.
[Mr. ROGERS of Florida addressed
the House. His remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.]
CORRECTION OF ROLLCALL
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Speaker, on roll-
call No. 230 I note that I am recorded
as having voted in the negative. I an-
swered "aye" when my name was called,
and prior to the completion of the roll-
call, I inquired of the desk if I had been
recorded. This inquiry was misunder-
Approvd For Release 2007/01/20 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200150004-3
?.CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
stood, and I was erroneously recorded
as changing my vote. I ask unanimous
consent that the, perma nent REcoxp and
the Journal )oe corrected accorcLinglY
and that I be. properly recorded as hav-
ing voted ye." _
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gentle-
man from New Yori0 -
There was no objection.
? - A
COMMITTEE ON THE- AiSTE4CT OF
COLT1MIXA
Mr. ROBERTS or Te as. Mr. Speak-
er, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on the District,of Columbia
have until midnight Friday to file cer-
tain reports. , ?

The SPEAKER pro tonpore-. Is there
Objection to the request of the gentle-
man from Texas?
There was no objection.
CARIBBEAN AND ISTEMIAN
POLl-
CIS--SEQ 1.TEL
-
(Mr. FLOOD (at the_ request- of Mr.
Roamers of Texas) was given Perrilis-
sion to extend his remarks a this point
In the Rocosa and to inolucle extraneous
Matter.)
Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, in a state-
Ment to the House in the, RgeOaa of
September 14, 1962, pages 18409-18410,
I outlined a three-point program of ac-
tion for the Congress with respect to the
Mounting crisis in the Caribbean and
Mentioned that I had introduced three
rescaitions to support ;he program.
Tlie first of these reiolutiens, House
' Concurrent Resolution 225, to reaffirm
the Monroe Doctrine, was quoted in the
September 14 stateinent, along with my
testimony on that subject in hearings on
January 12, 1960, before the committee
? O n Foreign Affairs.
.?The other two resolutions, House Con-
current Resolution,525, which relates to
the, sovereignty and jurisdiction of the
Canal Zone, and House Concurrent Res-
olution 526, which relates to the sur-
ruttier by the United StE.,tes to any other
authority of its ownership, control, and
jurisdiction over the Panama Canal en-
terprise, follow:
H. CON, RE61 525
Whereas the United States, under the Hay-
Hunau-Varilla Treaty of 1003 with Panama,
acquired complete and exc usive sovereignty
oVer the Canal Zone in perpetuity for con-
struction of the Panama Canal and its per-
petual maintenance, operation, sanitation,
and protection; and
Whereas all jurisdiction of the Eepublic
of Panama over the Cana Zone ceased on
eichange of ratifications of the 1903 treaty
on February 26, 1904; and
Whereas since that time the United States
has continuously exercised exclusive sover-
eignty and control over the, Canal Zone and
Panama Canal; and
Whereas where responsibility is imposed
there must be given for its effectuation ade-
quate authority; and with respect to the
Panama Canal the treaty of 1903 so pro-
vided, and
-
, Whereas the United States has fully and
effectively discharged all its treaty obliga-
tions with respect to the Panama Canal_and
the only legitimate interest that Panama
can have in 'he sovereignty of the Canal
Zone is one of reversionary character that
can never become operative unless the
United Rates should abandon the canal
enterr rise; and
Whereas the policy of the United States
since .president Hayes' message to the Con-
gress on March 8, 1880, has been for an
interooeanic canal "under American con-
trol," that is to say, under the control of
th_e_lm.itgitSte