Mr. GALLAGHER. And what percentage they represent. (The information follows:) Mr. WOLFF. One of the things I have been critical of about AID is the fact that they have done surveys of manufacturing abilities and facilities, but have done very little in the surveys of markets abroad that could exist for the type of products that could be produced in a single country. I am just wondering whether or not there are any projects that AID or we are engaged in today that could provide the Koreans with the knowledge of what type of products to produce to provide them with the export market. Ambassador PORTER. Yes, we have done something of that nature in Korea, but the problem is that we have run into a Korean desire to make money fast on the lines that they have under control. They say that when they build up their exchange and can buy equipment to open up other lines for export, they will do it. There are several things they might do with South America, as I understand, but it simply has not been reached. Thought has been given to it and there is constant thought of moving in that direction. Whether we have pointed out a number of areas for them, I don't know, but I am moving toward finding that out. Mr. WOLFF. I have found that people move and try to find a market for what they have produced rather than finding a market and then producing the market needs. Ambassador PORTER. You are right, but lots of times there is a problem internally in getting them to expand their range of production. They have resources only for a certain number of products. Mr. KAZEN. How many people voted in the last presidential election? Ambassador PORTER. Approximately 15.6 million were registered, and over 12 million voted. Mr. KAZEN. Out of those 12 million, Park got a majority of 960,000? Ambassador PORTER. 950,000. Mr. KAZEN. By our standards, that is not too close. Ambassador PORTER. That is 53 percent. He did pretty well. Who, in your opinion, or actually known, exerts more influence on North Korea? Is it China or Russia? Ambassador PORTER. At the present time, it is a little difficult to say which one exerts more influence. Sometimes, undoubtedly, when the North Koreans require equipment which only the Russians can furnish, say MIG aircraft, they have to behave in a manner pleasing to the Russians. At other times they seem closer to the Chinese. The Chinese and Russian radios give the North Koreans a good deal of attention. For example, the week after the ping-pong tournament in Peking, the Chinese spent a lot of time placating the North Koreans, who didn't put a single word about that tournament on their radio, obviously indicating displeasure. So the Chinese took the time to indicate every event, great and insignificant, that occurred in North Korea. This was a form of telling the North Koreans to hold on. Then the PRB invited the North Korean ping-pong team over there to establish a balance. The Russians were quiet on ping-pong matters in general, but later found something interesting on North Korean agriculture to spend a similar number of days and broadcasting time on. They are both-I wouldn't say vying for the favor of the North Koreans by any means-but they are both pretty careful, the Chinese and Russians, not to let the other gain supremacy for any length of time. Mr. KAZEN. Both countries have missions in North Korea? Mr. KAZEN. Thank you. Mr. GALLAGHER. Mr. Ambassador, we would like, for the record, if you could prepare for us a chronology of the historical arrangements and agreements which exist between Korea and the United States. Ambassador PORTER. We have all that. Mr. GALLAGHER. We would appreciate it if you could submit that for the record, and what the defense arrangements are, and the mutual security arrangements that exist between the Soviet Union and the North Koreans and the Peoples Republic of China. (The following information was subsequently furnished:) A list of treaties and other agreements between the United States and the Republic of Korea is attached. The principal provision of the Treaty is Article III: "Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific area on either of the Parties in territories now under their respective administrative control, or hereafter recognized by one of the Parties as lawfully brought under the administrative control of the other, would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes." The Parties undertook in Articles I and II to settle any international disputes by peaceful means, and agreed to consult whenever the political independence or security of either is threatened by external armed attack. The ROK granted to the U.S. the right to dispose land, air and sea forces in and about ROK territory as determined by mutual agreement (Article IV). The Senate gave its advice and consent to ratification with the understanding that the Treaty obligates the United States to assist Korea only in the case of an external armed attack "against territory which has been recognized by the United States as lawfully brought under the administrative control of the Republic of Korea." 2. The Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation, 1956 The Treaty's provisions include "arrangements encouraging mutually beneficial investments, promoting mutually advantageous commercial intercourse and otherwise establishing mutual rights and privileges *** based in general upon the principles of national and of most-favored-nation treatment unconditionally accorded * *" 3. The Status of Forces Agreement, 1966 The Agreement covers facilities and areas and the status of United States armed forces in the Republic of Korea. The most important provision of the Agreement is Article XXII Criminal Jurisdiction: "1. Subject to the provisions of this Article, (a) the military authorities of the United States shall have the right to exercise within the Republic of Korea all criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by the law of the United States over members of the United States armed forces or civilian component, and their dependents; (b) the authorities of the Republic of Korea shall have jurisdiction over the members of the United States armed forces or civilian component, and their dependents, with respect to offenses committed within the territory of the Republic of Korea and punishable by the law of the Republic of Korea." In the Agreed Minutes to the SOFA the two Parties also reached the following understanding: "1. The authorities of the Republic of Korea, recognizing that it is the primary responsibility of the military authorities of the United States to maintain good order and discipline where persons subject to United States military laws are concerned, will, upon the request of the military authorities of the United States pursuant to paragraph 3(c), waive their primary right to exercise jurisdiction under paragraph 3(b) except when they determine that it is of particular importance that jurisdiction be exercised by the authorities of the Republic of Korea." Copies of the first and third are attached. Other important commitments are the following: 1. Presidents Johnson-Park Communique, May 18, 1965 The U.S. will continue to provide military assistance to make available local currency funds generated by U.S. assistance to the Korean defense effort, and to review the MAP Transfer Program annually. 2. Vice President Humphrey in Korca, February 1966 "The USG and the US people have a firm commitment to the defense of Korea.” As long as one American soldier is on . . . “demarcation line, the entire power of the U.S. is committed to the security and defense of Korea." 3. Ambassador Brown's Letter of March 4, 1966 The ROKG is to continue to pay the base pay of ROK troops in Viet-Nam; the USG is to pay all other costs. (This and other commitments concerning the deployment of ROK troops to Viet-Nam appear in the transcript of the Symington Subcommittee hearings on U.S. comments, February, 1970.) 4. Presidents Johnson-Park Communique, November 2, 1966 President Park was assured that the U.S. had no plan to reduce U.S. forces in Korea, would support Korean armed forces at levels adequate to ensure Korea's security, especially the Second Five Year Plan. 5. Vance Communique, February 15, 1968 President Park and Mr. Vance reaffirmed the commitment of the two countries to undertake immediate consultations whenever the security of the ROK is threatened. 6. Presidents Johnson-Park Communique, Honolulu, April 18, 1968 President Johnson reaffirmed the readiness and determination of the U.S. to render, in accordance with the Mutual Defense Treaty, prompt and effective assistance to repel armed attacks against the ROK. 7. Presidents Nixon-Park Communique, San Francisco, August 22, 1969 The Presidents agreed that ROK forces and American forces stationed in Korea must remain strong and alert. The two Presidents reaffirmed the determination of their Governments to meet armed attack against the ROK in accordance with the Mutual Defense Treaty. 8. Joint Statement of February 6, 1971 concerning Modernization of the ROK Forces TREATIES IN FORCE A LIST OF TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES IN FORCE ON JANUARY 1, 1971 This publication lists treaties and other international agreements of the United States on record in the Department of State on January 1, 1971 which had not expired by their terms or which had not been denounced by the parties, replaced or superseded by other agreements, or otherwise definitely terminated. Compiled by the Treaty Affairs Staff, Office of the Legal Adviser, Department of State. Agriculural commodities KOREA Agricultural commodities agreement, with exchange of notes. Signed at Seoul March 2, 1962; entered into force March 2, 1962. 13 UST 254; TIAS 4969; 442 UNTS 185. Amendment: June 12, 1962 (13 UST 1297; TIAS 5082; 459 UNTS 342). Agricultural commodities agreement with exchange of notes. Signed at Seoul November 7, 1962; entered into force November 7, 1962. 13 UST 1297; TIAS 5208; 462 UNTS 129. Amendments: June 17, 1963 (14 UST 903; TIAS 5375; 479 UNTS 416). Amendment: June 15, 1964 (15 UST 732; TIAS 5597; Agricultural commodities agreement with exchange of notes. Signed at Seoul December 31, 1964; entered into force December 31, 1964. 15 UST 2396; TIAS 5730; 535 UNTS 315. Agricultural commodities agreement with exchange of notes. Signed at Seoul March 7, 1966; entered into force March 7, 1966. 17 UST 239; TIAS 5973; 579 UNTS 137. Amendment: December 5, 1966 (18 UST 98; TIAS 6203). Agricultural commodities agreement with annex. Signed at Seoul March 25, 1967; entered into force March 25, 1967. 18 UST 1228; TIAS 6272. Amendment: February 24, 1968 (19 UST 4656; TIAS 6455). Related agreements: May 10, 1968 (19 UST 5495; TIAS 6536). October 23, 1968 (19 UST 7541; TIAS 6595). February 26, 1969 (20 UST 522; TIAS 6661). April 8, 1969 (20 UST 644; TIAS 6669). March 20, 1970 (21 UST 1057; TIAS 6859). Atomic energy Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of atomic energy. Signed at Washington February 3, 1956; entered into force February 3, 1956. 7 UST 161; TIAS 3490; 240 UNTS 129. Extension and amendments: March 14, 1958 (9 UST 535; TIAS 4030; 316 UNTS 358). Agreement providing for a grant to the Government of Korea to assist in the quisition of certain nuclear research and training equipment and materials. Exchange of notes at Seoul October 14 and November 18, 1960; entered into force November 18, 1960. 11 UST 2364; TIAS 4617; 400 UNTS 49. Aviation Air transport agreement. Signed at Washington April 24, 1957; entered into force April 24, 1957. 8 UST 549; TIAS 3807; 288 UNTS 219. Claims Utilities claims settlement agreement between the Unified Command and Korea. Signed at Seoul December 18, 1958; entered into force December 18, 1958. 10 UST 41; TIAS 4168; 325 UNTS 233. Consuls Consular convention.1 Signed at Seoul January 8, 1963; entered into force December 19, 1963. 14 UST 1637; TIAS 5469; 493 UNTS 105. Defense Arrangement relating to the transfer of authority to the Government of the Republic of Korea and the withdrawal of United States occupation forces. Exchange of letters at Seoul August 9 and 11, 1948; entered into force August 11, 1948. Agreement concerning interim military and security matters during the transitional period. Signed at Seoul August 24, 1948; entered into force August 24, 1948. 62 Stat. 3817; TIAS 1918; 79 UNTS 57, Mutual defense assistance agreement. Signed at Seoul January 26, 1950; entered into force January 26, 1950. 1 UST 137; TIAS 2019; 80 UNTS 205. Mutual defense treaty. Signed at Washington October 1, 1953; entered into force November 17, 1954. 5 UST 2368; TIAS 3097; 238 UNTS 199. Agreed minute relating to continued cooperation in economic and military matters. Initialed at Seoul November 17, 1954; entered into force November 17, 1954. 6 UST 3913; TIAS 3396; 256 UNTS 251. Amendment: January 30, 1962 (13 UST 244; TIAS 4967; 422 UNTS 323). Agreement relating to the establishment of minimum facilities for an arsenal and the reworking of ammunition. Exchange of notes at Seoul May 29, 1955; entered into force May 29, 1955. 6 UST 3919; TIAS 3397; 256 UNTS 263. Agreement providing for the disposition of equipment and materials furnished to Korea under the mutual defense assistance agreement. Exchange of notes at Seoul May 28 and July 2, 1956; entered into force July 2, 1956. 7 UST 2174; TIAS 3616; 281 UNTS 41. Agreement under article IV of the mutual defense treaty of October 1, 1953, regarding facilities and areas and the status of United States armed forces in Korea, with agreed minutes and exchange of notes. Signed at Seoul July 9, 1966; entered into force February 9, 1967. 17 UST 1677; TIAS 6127. Agreement regarding the status of the Korean Service Corps with agreed understandings. Signed at Seoul February 23, 1967; entered into force March 10, 1967. 18 UST 249; TIAS 6226. Economic and technical cooperation Agreement on economic coordination between the Republic of Korea and the United States acting as the Unified Command, with exchange of notes and minutes." 1 Applicable to all areas of land and water subject to the sovereignty or authority of either state, except the Panama Canal Zone. Superseded February 28, 1961 with exception of para. 13, article III, by agrement of February 8, 1961 (TIAS 4710). |