Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

In the face of the many erroneous impressions which appear to exist about the nonpayment of regular member assessments, we would like to take notice at this point of what appears to us to be a commendable record of payment to the general budget of the United Nations.

As this committee is aware, at the beginning of this year only $53,000 of the $61.5 million assessed in 1959 remained unpaid. A little over $3 million was then owed for the 1960 assessment of $58.4 million and only $9.8 million remained to be paid of the assessment of $69.4 million for 1961.

We realize that the lack of payment by many nations of the "special" assessments has caused the present crises. If similar future crises are to be avoided we can only hope that the advisory opinion handed down by the International Court of Justice-this was typed up before the good news last Friday-will be to the effect that such special assessments are mandatory and that article 19, which provides for loss of voting rights by those 2 years in arrears, is applicable to those nations refusing the responsibility of these special assessments; or that studies now reported to be underway in the United Nations will offer new solutions to its financing.

Because we believe that the United Nations has been effective in spite of the fundamental problems it has faced in its short life, and because we can foresee chaos if the United Nations is weakened by the danger of bankruptcy, we in the AAUW urge that the United States reiterate its faith in the United Nations through acceptance of the $100 million United Nations bond issue now under consideration in this committee.

We thank you for the privilege of appearing before this committee for the purpose of presenting the viewpoint of the AAUW. Chairman MORGAN. Thank you, Mrs. Bell.

Mrs. Bell, what is the total membership of the AAUW?

Mrs. BELL. It is roughly 150,000, slightly over. We are in all 50 States.

Chairman MORGAN. When did you meet here in Washington? Was it in June of 1961 %

Mrs. BELL. That is right, last year.

We have had two board meetings in the interim period. At the last one we discussed at length the bond issue, I think, for about 3 hours.

Chairman MORGAN. And the board meeting made a recommendation to go on record endorsing the purpose of the $100 million for the U.N. bonds!

Mrs. BELL. That is right.

Chairman MORGAN. Mrs. Bell, has your organization always supported the U.N.?

Mrs. BELL. Always, ever since the original idea was proposed. Chairman MORGAN. You think you speak then for your 150,000 membership in endorsing the purposes

Mrs. BELL. Of course we have people who don't agree with the overall program. I think our opinion poll and convention vote show it runs between 80 and 90 percent, usually 93 or 94 approving the actions we have taken.

Chairman MORGAN. You would say over 90 percent of your membership endorses

Mrs. BELL. I would say that is right. This is not a membership poll. It is a branch poll that we conduct, and the program is submitted to and adopted biennially by our convention delegates. Chairman MORGAN. Thank you, Mrs. Bell.

Dr. Judd.

Mr. JUDD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It is nice to see you here again, Mrs. Bell. Your organization always presents a well thought out and well reasoned statement, which is helpful.

I am sure you know that the opposition to this bond issue, or so it seems to me at least, comes largely from two groups. There are a lot of people in our country who have never been for the U.N. Of course, they are opposed to this or anything else that would support it. There is a more disturbing one: There are a lot of people who have been for the U.N. and are for the U.N. but they aren't for its actions in the Congo.

I think almost everybody supports the UNEF operation where the U.N. has been holding forces apart that probably would otherwise have gotten into armed conflict. But many feel strongly that the U.N. action in the Congo was not in accordance with the charter of the U.N., but rather in violation of the charter.

We get a lot of mail from genuinely sincere people who feel the U.N. itself is being endangered when it mobilizes armed forces and sends them into areas which are not attacking anybody else. That is, when the U.N. mobilizes forces to go to the assistance of South Korea which is being attacked by North Korea, they approve. But if the U.N. had mobilized forces in South Korea to invade North Korea, they would have opposed. This is the way they interpret the Congo operation.

You know my position all these years in favor of the U.N., but the public is not convinced that it is wise or proper for the U.N. to try to impose its will on people who are not actually breaking the peace. Tshombe and his regime were not breaking the peace by attacking the rest of the Congo. Apparently he was trying only to run his own show.

I must say that if I had been in a position where my area was solvent and able to maintain order, and I was asked to underwrite an outfit which was not able to get along economically and was full of disorder, it would have been pretty hard to persuade me as the head of a going concern to consent to being put under an ungoing concern, that could survive only by being shored up from the outside.

I am appealing to you for help on this point, because I have not found an adequate answer to these people.

Mrs. BELL. Dr. Judd, we were terribly concerned when the international relations committee met for 22 days. The legislative committee met for 22 days after that, and then our board met.

I told Dr. Morgan before you came in that we discussed this matter for something between 2 and 3 hours in the board meeting.

I think you know from your experience with our organization that our committee, the international relations committee and the legislative program committee is made up of many types of people. Women of such stature as Prof. Gwendolen C. Carter, Smith College; Dean Meribeth E. Cameron, Mount Holyoke; Prof. Louise W. Hol

born, Connecticut College for Women; Prof. Mary Oliver Clabaugh Write, Yale; Prof. Isabel Ross Abbott, Western College for Women; Mrs. Edwin P. Jordan, University of Virginia; Prof. Dorothy H. Veon, Pennsylvania State University; Dr. Marian Spector, Seattle, Wash.; Dean Eunice Roberts, University of Indiana, and Dean Jean Brownlee, of the University of Pennsylvania, make up these committees. So these women have of course varying viewpoints. I sat and listened to a discussion that went on for a good part of 1 day on the Congo. There is reason to wonder about it all, as you suggest.

The international relations committee made a recommendation that in their best and considered judgment the operation in the Congo, that we had to support the United Nations, that there must be factors that we didn't know about, and that your committee and the other committees, the State Department, must know best what to do about it. So we had decided to support the U.N. bond issue.

As an additional step, after these committees reported, the board took a most unusual action, and asked that we do a special education job on the United Nations bond issue in the communities in which the AAUW has branches.

We have had spring workshops and we have discussed the issue in these workshops. I don't say we have been entirely successful in 1,500 branches. It depends on the quality of our leadership in our branches whether we have been, or not, getting our story over. We have been trying because we think it is vital to the life of the United Nations to have some security and financial stability.

Mr. JUDD. I hope that we keep the difference clear. There is opposition from those who oppose the United Nations; there is also opposition from those who support the United Nations but oppose this particular operation. The latter are the more serious. It is a disturbed group.

Mrs. BELL. It is very disturbed and serious. We can't afford to offend them and get them alienated. That is why we are attempting to explain the best we can. I don't know how good a job we are doing, but we try.

Mr. JUDD. You mentioned the bond issue proposed by U Thant. Actually it was proposed by the United States. This is our own baby. We can't put the blame or the credit on somebody else.

The fact that this is an American proposal, not somebody else's proposal which the United States is being asked to support is, in my opinion, an additional factor on the side of support of the proposal by this committee and the Congress.

Thank you very much.

Chairman MORGAN. Mr. Selden.

Mr. SELDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am glad to see you here again, Mrs. Bell.

If this special assessment problem is not solved as a result of the court's recent ruling and the action that will follow in the U.N., do you foresee the necessity of recurring bond issues?

Mrs. BELL. I would hope not more than one more would be necessary. The members of the organization I represent did in the sessions that I have been speaking of hope that some way would be found of financing this kind of operation because I think we can anticipate crises.

So something must be done to make other member nations, all of the member nations be in support of them.

I can foresee what the Soviet Union will do from my experience in analyzing Russian propaganda in military intelligence.

Nonetheless, I think the victory last Friday was a substantial one, psychologically, for us. I should think we could get a two-thirds vote in the General Assembly.

Mr. SELDEN. While we all recognize that the decision by the World Court was an advisory opinion, certainly it should influence to some extent the vote in the General Assembly.

However, if this financial dilemma is not solved as a result of the Court's decision, will additional bond issues be necessary?

Mrs. BELL. I hope only one more if any is necessary.

Since we have been told that there are studies going on at the present time, surely someone can come up with some solution to this problem which will recur.

Mr. SELDEN. I hope a final solution can be found as I foresee the possibility of it not being solved as the result of a single bond issue and sooner or later the matter having to be brought to a head. I am sure the American people are not going to continue to support recurring bond issues to pay the delinquent assessment of nations that refuse to cooperate when it doesn't suit their fancy.

Mrs. BELL. I think we might be well advised to consider that the possibility may come up where we will need another bond issue. I hope not, but I think

Mr. SELDEN. Do you think there is such a possibility in the not too distant future?

Mrs. BELL. There is not too much space of time in which we have to work for a solution.

Chairman MORGAN. Mr. Broomfield.

Mr. BROOMFIELD. No questions, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman MORGAN. Mr. Murphy.

Mr. MURPHY. No questions.

Chairman MORGAN. Mr. O'Hara.

Mr. O'HARA. Mrs. Bell, it has been very nice having you with us again.

Mrs. BELL. It is a pleasure, Mr. O'Hara.

Mr. O'HARA. I feel you have made a contribution, as you always do when you appear before this committee. It strengthens my faith in this proposal that you too are with it.

Mrs. BELL. We are very much with your proposal.

Mr. JUDD. Mr. Chairman, may I make an additional comment on the point which you and I have discussed earlier. You must recognize, Mrs. Bell, and I am sure you do, that this advisory opinion of the International Court helps in certain respects and it probably hurts in other respects. Because some are saying, as they said before, that if the advisory opinion is that all members must pay their regular share of special assessments made for whatever purpose by a two-thirds vote in the General Assembly, we can easily be outvoted and be called on or compelled to support U.N. projects or operations to which as a nation we are completely opposed.

I have said many times that I am convinced from my work in the U.N. that if the United States has a good cause and we are effective in

presenting it, there will never be a two-thirds vote for something that we fundamentally disapprove. But it is a possibility, and a careful legislator has to consider possibilities as well as probabilities.

The argument goes, "Should we approve a plan under which countries which altogether pay less to the U.N. than we do, can vote operations of whose costs we have to pay 32 percent, though the operations may be even directed against ourselves?"

This advisory opinion has a good side-it makes the bonds a better investment; but from the standpoint of practical politics, it perhaps increases the difficulties facing the bond authorization here in the Congress in the next few weeks. The opinion can be a rallying point for opposition.

Mrs. BELL. We will have to stay aware of it too. Thank you.
Chairman MORGAN. Thank you, Mrs. Bell.

Mrs. Brown.

Our next witness is Mrs. Donald Brown, representing the National Council of Jewish Women.

It is nice seeing you again, Mrs. Brown. We remember when you were here on the mutual security bill.

Mrs. Brown, you have a prepared statement and you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF MRS. DONALD BROWN, REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN

Mrs. BROWN. I am Mrs. Donald Brown, member of the National Public Affairs Committee of the National Council of Jewish Women. I appreciate the opportunity of appearing before your committee in support of the United Nations bond issue.

The United Nations and its relationship to U.S. foreign policy is a longstanding concern of the National Council of Jewish Women, an organization established in 1893, with a current membership of 123,000 in 329 communities throughout the United States.

For more than half a century council members have worked actively for the attainment of world peace through international understanding. From the time of Dumbarton Oaks, the council has taken an active part in stimulating popular support for the formation of the U.N.

We have maintained an official accredited observer at the United Nations since 1945 who reports regularly to our membership on the programs and decisions of the General Assembly, the Security Council, and the agencies of the U.N.

It has long been the conviction of our organization that a sound U.S. foreign policy has to be based on support of the U.N. and use of its resources. Å national resolution to this effect, adopted by the National Council of Jewish Women in 1946 and reaffirmed every 2 years since then, urges the United States

to work to strengthen the United Nations, its specialized agencies and the International Court of Justice, as the media through which the conditions of peace are achieved by the adjustments of the national interests of the member nations.

Our faith in the U.N. is neither unrealistic nor based on wishful thinking. The work and progress of the Organization is frequently restudied and reappraised by our membership. We sponsor an annual U.N. Institute at the seat of the United Nations with some sessions

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »