The Secretary went on to refer to grave economic problems which confront the world and which constitute a basic cause for the existing political problems. Contrasting the nature of the economic problems in this hemisphere with those in Europe and the East, he stated: "Our problems are long-range peacetime problems requiring more intensive economic planning for the more efficient use of the tools of production and of the abundant resources at our disposal with which to raise the general standard of living of this hemisphere. "The Government of the United States of America has assumed unusually heavy burdens in a determined effort to meet the minimum economic requirements of the areas devastated by war and now threatened with starvation and economic chaos. In assuming this burden we have not lost sight of the economic problems of the Western Hemisphere. As a matter of fact, the economic rehabilitation of Europe is vital to the economy of this hemisphere. My Government will continue to take up economic questions with its sister Republics and seek a sound basis for practical cooperation. Each of our countries must do its part in the achievement of this goal." The Conference was formally closed at a session held on September 2, 1947, addressed by the Honorable Raul Fernandes, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Brazil and president of the Conference; the Honorable Harry S. Truman, President of the United States; and the Honorable Domingo Esguerra, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Colombia. President Truman, after lauding the achievements of the Conference, took occasion to discuss certain of the major political and economic problems facing the world and outlined the policy and course of action of the United States in dealing with these problems. He continued: "This is the course which our country is endeavoring to follow. I need not tell you how important it is to our success that we have your understanding, support, and counsel. The problem is in the deepest sense a common one for this hemisphere. There is no important aspect of it which does not affect all of us. No solution of it can be fully successful in which we do not all cooperate. "I have already mentioned our collective responsibility for economic assistance. By the grace of God and by our united armed efforts our countries have been saved from the destruction of war. Our economies are intact, our productive powers undiminished, our resources not even yet fully explored. In consequence, our collective importance in the affairs of a distressed world has become immense. "The Western Hemisphere cannot alone assure world peace, but without the Western Hemisphere no peace is possible. The Western Hemisphere cannot alone provide world prosperity, but without the Western Hemisphere no world prosperity is possible." Concerning the relations among the nations of this hemisphere, the President stated: "I have no desire to overlook the difficulties that have been encountered in the past and will continue to be encountered in the future. All of us are young and vigorous nations. At times we have been impetuous in our relations with one another. There has been a natural tendency for us to exhibit the same exuberance in our differences and our criticisms as in our friendships. Wide differences of background and tradition have had to be overcome. "But I believe that we may view with sober satisfaction the general history of our hemisphere. There has been steady progress in the development of mutual respect and of understanding among us. . . "There are many concrete problems ahead of us on the path of interAmerican relations. They will not be solved with generalities or with sentimentality. They will call for the utmost we can give in practical ingenuity, in patience, and good will. But their solution will be easier if we are able to set our sights above the troubles of the moment and to bear in mind the great truths upon which our common prosperity and our common destiny must rest. "This Western Hemisphere of ours is usually referred to as the New World. That it is the New World is clearer today than ever before. The Old World is exhausted, its civilization imperiled. Its people are suffering. They are confused and filled with fears for the future. Their hope must lie in this New World of ours. “... We cannot depend upon those who are weaker than we to achieve a peace for us to enjoy. "It is for us, the young and the strong, to erect the bulwarks which will protect mankind from the horrors of war-forever. "The United States seeks world peace-the peace of free men. I know that you stand with us. United, we can constitute the greatest single force in the world for the good of humanity.” CHAPTER TWO Work of the Conference: 'HE work of the Conference may be divided into two parts: (1) the conclusion of the treaty to implement the Act of Chapultepec; and (2) the consideration of related resolutions and other measures. A total of approximately 150 proposals for provisions of the treaty were submitted for the consideration of the Conference by the various governments, exclusive of the large number of amendments, proposals, and changes informally put forward by various delegations in the course of the deliberations of the Conference. It was the task of the working committees and the drafting subcommittees to study these proposals, to eliminate those which did not receive general support, and to reduce the others to acceptable language for inclusion in the treaty. As finally agreed upon, the following are the principal provisions of the treaty: 2 1. A reference to certain basic considerations and precedents contained in the preamble. 2. A reaffirmation of basic principles of pacific settlement (arts. 1 and 2). 3. Obligations in the event of an armed attack against an American state (arts. 3 and 4). 1 Appendix two, part 1. 2 Appendix one, part 3. 11 4. Obligations in the event of other dangers to continental peace (art. 6). 5. A specification of the collective measures to be taken to maintain and restore continental peace (arts. 7 and 8). 6. Method of voting in agreeing upon collective measures and the binding effect of decisions (arts. 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20). 7. Designation of the organs and procedures of consultation and execution (arts. 11, 12, 13, 15, and 21). 8. A specification of certain acts of aggression (art. 9). 9. Obligations assuring consistency with the United Nations Charter (arts. 5 and 10). 10. Protocolary articles (arts. 22 through 26). The rest of this chapter is devoted to an analysis of these provisions and a brief account of the principal problems and issues that arose in reaching agreement upon them. Preamble The 11 major proposals submitted for the preamble1 contained a number of common provisions which were generally accepted for inclusion in the final text. They were directed toward the primary purpose of placing the treaty in a setting of traditional inter-American desires for peaceful relations and laying a foundation for the obligations contained in the substantive portions of the treaty. Thus the necessary reference to the Act of Chapultepec found in all the proposals was incorporated in the first clause of the preamble. A renewed pledge of the American Republics to remain united in the inter-American system and to assure that the system is consistent with the United Nations Charter 2 is set forth as the second paragraph of the preamble proper. The original proposals of the United States, as well as those of Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Panama, contained a more explicit reference to those articles of the United Nations Charter (principally arts. 33 and 51, through 54) which apply to regional arrangements and agencies, and in the course of the discussions the United States delegation expressed its preference for, but did not seek to insist upon, such reference, as providing a more specific basis for certain provisions in the treaty. It was felt by a majority of the drafting committee, however, that the general reference to the Charter would suffice, particularly in view of more 2 1 Appendix two, part 1A. For pertinent articles of the Charter, see appendix three, part 4, p. 223. specific reference to certain of the Charter obligations contained in the body of the treaty. With respect to the third paragraph in the preamble, a major point of difference in the proposed preambles submitted required some discussion and resolution by the committee. The drafts presented by Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Panama contained a reiteration of a number of principles relating to the rights and duties of American states in their international relations, reproducing for the most part those principles contained in the preamble of the Act of Chapultepec, and the draft submitted by Chile contained a statement that these principles as set forth in the act "should be considered as reproduced textually" in the treaty itself. The United States delegation, however, took the position that the principles themselves should not be restated in the preamble. It was pointed out that, pursuant to another resolution of the Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace (Mexico City, 1945) all the basic principles covering the relations among the American states are to be contained in a "Declaration of the Rights and Duties of States," to be drawn up by the forthcoming Ninth International Conference of American States, and that, since the statement of the principles in that declaration will undoubtedly differ both in substance and in form from their less carefully framed statement at Chapultepec, the United States delegation suggested that to include the principles in the treaty might result in conflict, or at least different phrasing of the same concepts in the two instances. After some debate it was agreed that the preamble should simply reaffirm the adherence of the parties to the "principles of inter-American solidarity and cooperation and especially to those set forth in the preamble and declarations of the Act of Chapultepec" (par. 3 of the preamble). Although the Colombian delegation strongly urged that all these principles be stated to be "juridically binding" on all the parties, this view was finally rejected on the ground that not all of the principles generally referred to had been unconditionally accepted by all the republics. The paragraph, therefore, goes on to say that these principles "should be understood to be accepted as standards of their mutual relations and as the juridical basis of the inter-American system." Since it was generally agreed that detailed provisions concerning pacific settlement procedures would not be included in the treaty, and since it was recognized that the treaty would be but part of the interAmerican peace system, it was felt that the preamble should give recognition of this fact by referring to the proposed treaty concern 772629-48- -2 |