STATEMENT OF OTIS MULLIKEN, OFFICER IN CHARGE, UNITED NATIONS SOCIAL AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF UNITED NATIONS AFFAIRS

Mr. MULLIKEN. I have heard the figure of $250,000 mentioned but I do not know that that is accurate.

Mr. HARRISON. Is that the CIO economist?

Mr. VORYS. It is the United Nations Organization. It is in addition to the 410 people they have: 97 in New York, 25 in Tokyo, 16 in Washington, and 10 in Geneva, Switzerland, planning for Korea. They hired Bob Nathan on an independent contract to make a survey. We had one from, I think, Dr. Johnson, who was before our committee in 1949, a survey, and almost everybody you can think of has surveyed it, but that was one of the things that the former head of UNKRA authorized.

Mr. WOOD. May I ask Mr. Martin, of the State Department to make a further brief comment on this subject?

Mr. MARTIN. I think it is pertinent to the question that Mr. Vorys has raised, to recall the fact that the President has sent Mr. Henry Tasca to Korea to survey two things, one, the economic situation in Korea which is rather critical, and, two, the organizational arrangement which now exists to take care of the economic problem in Korea and to make recommendations as to how the organizations might be better coordinated and their efficiency improved.

He is expected back relatively shortly and I think he will undoubtedly have recommendations which bear on this question of the desirability of maintaining this large a staff for UNKRA, in relation to the staff under General Clark and the various other operations in Korea.

Mr. VORYS. Now can we get a more complete statement on the amount the United States had contributed to Korean rehabilitation! I think it is in excess of $400 million.

Can we have that now?

Mr. HENDERSON. That is on total United States Army expenditures for this purpose, sir?

Mr. VORYS. Yes.

Mr. HENDERSON. I do not have that figure, but I will be glad to obtain it.

Mr. VORYS. This all comes out of the same taxpayers whether it is in this bill or not, and it would be of significance right now in presenting such a thing to tell us what the taxpayers have spent.

When we contemplate proceeding with an international organization, we should know what the cost is currently for civilian supply and relief from the United States Army.

Mr. WOOD. I think we can get that, Mr. Vorys, right now.

Mr. VORYS. Well get it right now. It is perfectly ridiculous to present this thing here without it.

Mr. WOOD. If you will excuse me, I will have the military in here get that figure for you.

Mr. VORYS. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, but it is perfectly silly that at the end of our hearings, when we have this discouraging overstaffing of the United Nations Organization, that we do not have presented to us the alternative, the gigantic load that the United States Army is carrying. The proposals that we read in the paper are

that all the Koreans look forward to the United States for relief. There is where they do expect the United States to go it alone, and I, for one, do not expect to.

I think we should operate through the United Nations, but in order to present this picture intelligently to this committee, we should have those figures.

Mrs. BOLTON. Will the gentleman yield for a moment?

Mr. VORYS. I yield.

Mrs. BOLTON. Mr. Chairman, may I ask Mr. Martin why the President sent Mr. Tasca?

Was it because he did not believe the earlier surveys and all the different things?

Mr. MARTIN. I think there is a distinction between what Mr. Tasca is doing and what these earlier surveys did. They were looking toward the long-term reconstruction program. Mr. Tasca substantively was looking into an immediate crisis in the inflation which developed in Korea and which bore directly on the plans of the administration to assist the Republic of Korea in increasing the number of ROK divisions and thereby adding a heavy load to the Korean budget. He was looking into what needed to be done in order to enable the Korean economy to carry more divisions.

Organizationally his trip did reflect a sense that we had not had as well coordinated a program to deal with this immediate problem as we might have had.

Mrs. BOLTON. Thank you, very much.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Mr. Harrison

Mr. HARRISON. The lady would not think that the President would feel anything Nathan wrote would be worth reading?

Mrs. BOLTON. I am sure the President reads many sides of all matters dealing with the good of the American people.

Mr. Nathan is a man with a prodigious mind and a great deal of knowledge.

Mr. VORYS. I think that with such a great patriot, we could have gotten a good deal of advice from him for nothing instead of $250,000.

Mr. SMITH. I would like to ask something about this $250 million target. Was there a deadline set for the contributions to be paid in? You said, I think, that there are 206 pledges received.

Mr. HENDERSON. $206 million total; yes, sir.

Mr. SMITH. $68,977,259 has been paid in to date.

Was there a deadline established?

Mr. HENDERSON. No, sir; there was not.

Mr. SMITH. In other words, whenever they get a due bill, it is recognized?

Mr. HENDERSON. That is right.

Mr. SMITH. I wonder if we could have for the record, Mr. Chairman, a statement about this target of $250 million, the nations that have pledged, and what they have already contributed.

Mr. HENDERSON. Yes, sir; that was in the statement I submitted. for the record.

Mr. MULLIKEN. My impression is that he has not completed it as yet. He made a preliminary survey and further detailed studies were involved in what is called the Nathan report.

Mr. SMITH. When was it undertaken originally?

Mr. MULLIKEN. It was undertaken last fall, I believe.

Mr. SMITH. And he is still at it?

Mr. MULLIKEN. He is still at it.

Mr. VORYS. Your jobs are to represent the interest of the United States in United Nations affairs?

Mr. HENDERSON. In my case, the Division of International Administration is concerned with United States interests in administrative, fiscal, and budgetary matters with respect to all international organizations in which the United States participates.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Mr. Henderson, will you explain to Mr. Vorys that you intended to have another gentleman here, and why he could not be here?

Mr. VORYS. Do you mean that your office does not know anything about the United States contributions toward the international relief effort in Korea which is made through Army funds?

Mr. HENDERSON. We have not had detailed figures on that.

I mentioned at the outset, Mr. Vorys, if I may repeat: Mr. Graham Hall is a special representative for UNKRA affairs, to Assistant Secretary John Hickerson. He individually follows UNKRA matters and is in daily liaison with the Defense Department and with UNKRA as the acting United States representative on the UNKRA Advisory Committee.

He was called to Korea on urgent business last week and he had intended to be your witness today, and I am sorry that he is not here because he personally could answer, I am confident, these questions.

Mr. VORYS. When he leaves, there is nobody else in the office who has such information in mind when they start to make up international budgets?

Mr. HENDERSON. Not in that detail, sir. However, UNKRA programs are approved by United States Army authorities before they are submitted to the various governments participating in UNKRA for consideration.

Mr. VORYS. Thank you.

Mr. WOOD. We will have those figures for you in just a minute. Chairman CHIPERFIELD. If there are no further questions, we will proceed with another witness.

Mr. WOOD. Our next item is the program for the organization known as the ICEM, which stands for the Inter-Governmental Committee for European Migrants.

Mr. VORYS. Mr. Wood, before you proceed with that, have you already testified to the Army pipeline item in the bill here? Forty million seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars, or have I missed that?

Mr. Woon. That is part of the UNKRA item. Did you cover that? Mr. HENDERSON. I am sorry, sir.

Mr. WOOD. The $40 million pipeline item in the UNKRA request? Mr. HENDERSON. That figure was negotiated with the Army by Mr. Hall as the best estimate that could be given as to the amount that would be available out of the pipeline for this purpose at cessation of hostilities.

Mr. VORYS. What happened to the $67.5 million of last year?

Mr. HENDERSON. That figure was revised downward, Mr. Vorys, as I understand it, on the basis of these conversations with the Defense Department.

Mr. MARTIN. Authority to transfer $67.5 million of supplies from the Army pipeline was not used in fiscal year 1953, since the supplies become available only if there is an armistice in Korea and cessation of hostilities. We now say we think that only $40 million in pipeline supplies will be available to complete our pledge of $162.5 million in fiscal year 1954. Is that not correct?

Mr. HENDERSON. Yes. There would only be $40 million available in pipeline supplies and therefore it was necessary to request the remaining $71 million in cash.

Mrs. BOLTON. That was your reduction, from $65 million to $40 million?

Mr. HENDERSON. Yes, ma'am, the pipeline figure.

Mr. WOOD. Shall we proceed with the testimony on the Inter-Governmental Committee for European Migration.

Mr. George Warren, of the State Department, will explain to you the purpose of the $10 million that is contained in the request for authorization for that purpose.

Mr. Warren.

STATEMENT OF GEORGE L. WARREN, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR UNITED NATIONS AFFAIRS FOR REFUGEE MATTERS

Mr. WARREN. I have a statement here which gives the history of the creation of the committee. The numbers that were moved out of Europe last year, the budgeted figures for this year and next year, and the fixed periods.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Without objection it will be included in the record.

(The document referred to follows:)

INTERGOVERN MENTAL COMMITTEE FOR EUROPEAN MIGRATION

Authorization is requested for $10 million for the United States contribution to the Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration (ICEM) in calendar year 1954. This request provides only for continuing the contribution in the same amount as originally established, even though the program of the committee now shows a considerable increase in the number of migrants expected to be moved (table I).

The considerations that led to the United States taking the initiative to establish the Commitee at Brussels in late 1951 are even more valid today. Since World War II United States foreign policy has been directed toward the establishment of stable political and economic conditions in Western Europe along with the development of military strength sufficient to meet the threat posed by the Soviet bloc. The inherent relationship of the gravity of the problem of excess population and the influx of refugees to the attainment of this goal was early recognized by the United States Government, including the Congress, and by the other governments of the free world. In May 1950, at a meeting of the allied powers, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States agreed that this problem is one of the most important elements in the difficulties and disequilibrium of Western Europe, requiring intergovernmental action to resolve. The 81st Congress in 1950 adopted related legislative provisions which in effect constituted a mandate for action by this Government,according to the

expressed opinion of the members of the House and Senate Committees on the Judiciary, which sponsored the legislation. Section 16 of Public Law 555 authorized the Government to participate in a conference of interested nations to develop ways of elleviating the problem of excess populations in Germany and Austria, and section 115 (e) of the ECA Act of 1948, as amended, directed the ECA Administrator to encourage emigration from participating countries having surplus manpower to areas where such manpower could be effectively utilized.

From studies made by the Department, by international agencies, and by various congressional committees, it has been generally assessed that (a) overpopulation to the extent of 3,500,000 to 5 million people will continue to be a grave economic and political problem in Europe, presenting the necessity of moving 700,000 migrants annually for the next several years, and (b) to increase the annual movement now estimated at 350,000 an intergovernmental organization is required to exploit the growing demand outside of Europe for manpower and to facilitate such movements of migrants as would not otherwise take place. Acting upon the above consideration, the United States Government took the initiative in convening a conference of 27 governments at Brussels in November 1951, as a result of which 16 of these governments formally established the Provisional Committee for the Movement of Migrants from Europe. (Since that time 1 government (Turkey) has failed to adhere to the Committee and 8 other governments have become members, of which 1 (Bolivia) by reason of a recent change in its government is currently in an indefinite status.) Additional governments have indicated interest in becoming members, including New Zealand, Spain, Peru, and other Latin-American countries. The 22 firm government members include 12 Western European and 6 Latin-American states, and Australia, Canada, Israel, and the United States. This increase in government members participating actively in the program of the Committee exemplifies the growing interest and concern of the free governments in resolving this problem.

A further indication of this growing concern was manifested by action proposed and supported by a large majority of government members at the last session of the Committee in October 1952 to establish the Committee on a more permanent basis and to broaden its activities. To those ends two resolutions were adopted. The first instructed the Director of ICEM to draw up a draft constitution to be presented to member governments for consideration during future sessions of the Committee. The second requested the Director to encourage the preparation of settlement plans of member governments wishing to increase the number of migrants to be received, to participate in the drafting of such plans and to further the completion of such plans as the governments concerned may be prepared to adopt. One of the purposes of this second resolution is to determine the best means of developing and applying available international financial and other resources to increase the movement of migrants through land-settlement projects, and the methods in which the member governments can help the Committee in these efforts.

The problems stemming from excess population and the influx of refugees from Soviet domination have grave economic and political significance. They are of deep concern not only to member governments of the Migration Committee but to the member governments of NATO and the Council of Europe, and to other governments of the Western World. The leadership of the United States in promoting intergovernmental action to alleviate these problems has been warmly welcomed and widely supported by these organizations and governments.

The efforts of the United States during the first year of the Committee's operation to secure a wider participation in the Committee by other governments and adequate financial contributions from such governments have been quite successful. Except in the instance of small contributions on the part of two governments, Bolivia and Paraguay, the assessments of all government members for 1952 have been paid in full. Though political and economic difficulties of a temporary nature in certain immigration countries, particularly Canada and Australia, developed to reduce the expected number of migrants moved during its first year, the Committee did make an encouraging start. This accomplishment should increase and gain momentum substantially during 1953 and 1954. If the Committee is to meet effectively this critical problem of excess population, it must expand its program during the next few years. To this end the full and energetic support of ICEM by the United States Government is essential. For these reasons it is requested that the United States be authorized to make a contribution to the Committee of $10 million in 1954.