try to sell to them different types of armament. If there is another struggle, which God forbid, in which we call upon our neighbors to the south for help, we will be in the same position as we were in 1941 unless this legislation is passed.

Now, one more question, General. The Brazilians had some forces in Italy during the war. Could you tell the committee what type of arms these Brazilians had?

Mr. JACKSON. General Eisenhower, referring back to a point that has been made several times this morning relative to the possibility of inter-American aggression, would not the standardization of arms and equipment, in the light of a continuing necessity for repairs and replacement items, have the effect of discouraging individual aggression by any one of the nations using such equipment or material against another?

In short, when you fire so many rounds through a fieldpiece, you have to replace the barrel?

General EISENHOWER. And you must have more ammunition.

Mr. JACKSON. If you do not have a source of supply for the equipment you are using, then that fieldpiece, or machine gun, or other item is, to all practical effects, of no use.

General EISENHOWER. That is right.

Mr. JACKSON. Would you care to comment, or give us some rough estimate, as to the approximate fighting manpower potential of the Western Hemisphere?

General EISENHOWER. No; I would have to send you that in a study, because we have certainly to distinguish among those as to their effectiveness, vou see, and I should think it would have to come from a study. There is probably one existing, but I am not aware of it.

Mr. JACKSON. Something has been said this morning of an aura of secrecy surrounding this program, which you have assured us is not the case. Is it your opinion that much of the strength of this program will be psychological, at least initially, and that the entire program will be greatly strengthened in the eyes of the world by complete and full knowledge of hemispheric solidarity?

General EISENHOWER. I am sure of that.

Mr. JACKSON. In other words, secrecy would work against our better interests in this program?

General EISENHOWER. You would want nothing to be star chamber in this at all.

Mr. JACKSON. Would the military phases of this act contemplate reorganization of the entire military and naval structures of the countries involved, using our own strategy and tactics as a working model?

General EISENHOWER. We would teach our own techniques, praceices, and methods in all of them and that would apply to all types of armament there. As I have said, our State Department, I am certain, would have the greatest concern that there would be no overextension in any direction, if for no other reason than for its impact upon the economic stability of this country which is equally important along with the military stability.

Mr. JACKSON. Thank you very much.

Chairman EATON. Mr. Colmer.

Mr. COLMER. General Eisenhower, a moment ago, in answer to a question from my colleague, Mr. Mansfield, you stated that there would be other powers that would be seeking to sell arms to these countries. General EISENHOWER. I must explain with a bit of embarassment, sir. I read the papers and I also read secret reports. Often I do not know where I have gotten my information. I am a little embarrassed. I do not know the names of those countries.

Mr. COLMER. I will not press that question. But, General, of course, in the present world situation, we all understand that the Soviet Republic is the aggressor nation. In other words, it is "No" every time we make some suggestion about world peace. They always place barriers in the plans for the peace.

Now with that situation existing, and in view of the obligations that we assumed many years ago with reference to the Monroe Doctrine, it just boils down to this, does it not, that if we are going to carry out the obligation of the Monroe Doctrine, if we are going to continue our efforts for world peace, that we are either going to furnish these arms to these neighbor nations, which is certainly to our interest, or else somebody else is going to furnish them, and that somebody in all likelihood will be Russia.

'General EISENHOWER. I will answer at least this part of your question, sir: If we do not furnish them, it is certain that at least some of them will secure arms from other nations. That is correct.

Mr. COLMER. I am ready to vote on the question. Chairman EATON. Mr. Vorys has one more question, General, and then we will ask Mr. Smith, who came in late, to interrogate.

Mr. VORYS. General, this is possibly something that came up earlier in a question, but what puzzles me is this:

We have been talking about the importance of hemispheric defense against external aggression. On the other hand, by our Declaration of Independence, we proclaimed to the world the right of people to choose their own government, and we proceeded to choose our Government by force, and we received great aid from France.

Our neighbors of the south have the right to secure the kind of government they want, and from time to time they have made that selection by force.

How is this plan going to tie in with the right of the people to secure he kind of government they want?

General EISENHOWER. I cannot see, Mr. Vorys, that it has the slightst effect, if you are talking about the INS and powers residing in eir hands; in other words, a dictatorship maintaining itself by rce, as long as it has weapons and the population has none, with spect to that problem, I see very little difference whether a gun opens to be an outmoded Mauser or a modern M-1. I can see nothing ical with respect to the situation you are talking about. Out of the whole program, I certainly voice the hope of every man now who is concerned with this thing, that we will lead them toward idea which after all is based primarily upon the rights of an indial and the rights of a man. We want to see power in every counresiding in the people. We trust such governments and trust such tries because we believe people do not want to fight wars.

that reason we are against dictatorship, entirely aside from the moral aspects of the thing.

Therefore, we would certainly hope through a scheme of this sort, to promote a family relationship between us and all the other countries. of the Americas, that they will, through their close associations, tend more and more toward the system in which we so thoroughly believe. - Mr. VORYS. Thank you.

Mr. JONKMAN. Is it not true that by their further cooperation of the republics we will have a tendency to eliminate the growth of dictatorships?

Take for instance the example of Nicaragua. I understand that Somosa got his power through the military help he got from the United States, and he, after being in power for 10 years, appointed Arguello, but Arguello did not carry out his mandates or his policies so he had him removed, and in a coup replaced by somebody by the name of Sacasa.

Is it not true that some of the other American Republics have not refused to recognize the present government in Nicaragua, and the further we go into this cooperative action, the more trust we will engender so it will be the spontaneous reaction of the South American Republics as well as ourselves?

In fact, is it not true that we abandoned that doctrine for a while, where formerly we would not recognize an illegitimate government? Then for many years we have said we will recognize the element in power that can keep order in the country, and now the South American countries are themselves changing by frowning on governments established by force?

General EISENHOWER. I certainly see the hope of leading us in the direction you are suggesting.

Mr. SMITH. Has the War Department been in conference with the Canadian Government on this program?

General EISENHOWER. We confer with the Canadian military services through our Permanent Joint Board on Defense, Canada-United States, constantly.

Mr. SMITH. That Board is set up right here in Washington, is it? General EISENHOWER. Yes; that is right.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you.

Chairman EATON. General, we want to thank you for the unusually illuminating and constructive statement you have made, and I would like to say on behalf of the entire membership of this committee that we are thankful that one of the greatest universities of this country is to have at its head the incarnation of the American spirit.

General EISENHOWER. Thank you very much, sir.

Chairman EATON. Our next witness is Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Chief of Naval Operations.

STATEMENT OF FLEET ADMIRAL CHESTER W. NIMITZ, CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS

Admiral NIMITZ. Mr. Chairman, I have a very brief statement which I would like to read, and then I will endeavor to answer questions.

A year ago I appeared before the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs in support of bill H. R. 6326, a measure which was similar to the one now under consideration.

The Congress, however, did not complete action on that bill. The presently proposed legislation before your committee, cited as "The Inter-American Military Cooperation Act," H. R. 3836, has been sponsored jointly by the State, War, and Navy Departments. The need for this legislation is greater now than last year because of the trend of world events.

The general subject of military cooperation and mutual assistance between all the countries of the Western Hemisphere, including Canada, has long been under consideration by the executive branch of the Government.

The Act of Chapultepec recognized the need for a mutual defense arrangement and this legislation is a step in the implementation of the obligations of the United States under that act.

An important objective to be accomplished under the authority of the bill is to effect a standardization of the military organization and equipment of the American states.

If this legislation is enacted the Navy Department proposes to transfer vessels and naval equipment to assist other nations of the Americas in establishing modern navies to provide for their defense needs. We propose to assist those nations in training personnel to man the ships and operate the equipment, so that in the event of conflict it will be possible to effect maximum coordination of effort between our respective navies. Standardization of equipment is of the greatest importance to efficient military operation.

Naval assistance to be given under the bill will be ships and equipment which are in excess of the naval needs of the United States. The Navy's program of assistance will be closely coordinated with that of other agencies of the Government.

It is planned that the character of assistance which will be rendered. to the American countries will be such as to permit them to protect themselves and to fulfill future commitments under the Act of Chapultepec and under the United Nations Charter. The result will be assistance to the United States in the defense of the Western Hemisphere. With the American countries able to protect their own coast lines and to police their own waters, the United States Fleet will be free to devote its attention to the protection of the coast and waters of the United States and our outlying possessions.

It is my opinion that the over-all costs to the United States of implementing the naval program will be small. Two major items of cost to the nations receiving this assistance will be the cost of placing the ships to be transferred in operable condition and the price charged for the ships in the terms of transfer.

Until H. R. 3836 becomes law and an Executive order is issued with the necessary details as to whether the vessels and equipment will be sold or presented as a gift, no estimate can be given as to the cost to the other American Governments. Although the cost to the United States cannot at present be determined, it is contemplated that the only charges, to the United States insofar as the Navy is concerned, will be indirect, such as pay of officers and men who assist in the program. There are now available from ships currently in excess of our needs,. some combatant and noncombatant vessels. Since these vessels are in excess, they could be transferred to the recipient nations at little or no cost. Other witnesses from the Navy Department will give the com

mittee detailed data, some of which I recommend be received in executive session.

I believe the proposed legislation to be in the national interest. I also believe that it will add to the peace and security of the Western Hemisphere.

That concludes my statement. I shall endeavor to answer questions. Chairman EATON. Mr. Vorys.

Mr. VORYS. Admiral, this is rather vague as to possible costs. The War Department was able to give us a rather definite figure as to the estimated cost, and we find that our colleagues on the floor inquire about that important matter more and more.

Is this the best you can do as to possible cost, simply to say that it cannot at present be determined?

Admiral NIMITZ. If we exclude the charge to be made to the recipi-. ent countries for the vessels which we transfer to them, I am confident that the cost, as far as the Navy is concerned, will be less than that of the Army for which I heard mentioned an annual estimate of $10,000,000.

Mr. VORYS. What are the figures being excluded?

Admiral NIMITZ. The cost that we proposed to charge to the foreign nations for the equipment we transfer.

Mr. VORYS. Then you mean the net cost to the United States Treasury would be less than $10,000,000?

Admiral NIMITZ. Yes, the annual cost. That is my guess.

Mr. VORYS. Are any other nations permitted to build naval ships in this country now? Could any South American country order a destroyer or other naval vessels built in our shipyards now?

Admiral NIMITZ. Not without the approval of the State Depart

ment.

Mr. VORYS. I understood that the munitions control law was a little weak, and I do not know whether that approval was provided through treaty, or under law, because the new proposed Munitions Control Act has not yet become law.

Do you know on what basis permission must be given for obtaining the ships from this country?

Admiral NIMITZ. I do not have the details, Mr. Vorys, but whatever the law is, it is sufficiently good to prevent orders being placed.

You and I have perhaps both read in the newspapers, attempts of one South American country to place orders for ships in this country, and to date that has not been done. Presumably the law is working. Mr. VORYS. Are there any South American countries now obtaining ships with the permission of the State Department? Are we building anything for any of them?

Admiral NIMITZ. We are building no ships of which I know, but we are transferring ships under lend-lease provisions on interim agreements, but they are all minor ship types.

Mr. VORYS. This program would not involve capital ships, would it?

Admiral NIMITZ. I do not think so.

Mr. VORYS. The purpose would be almost entirely a matter of coastal defense, is that not correct?

Admiral NIMITZ. That is correct.