Senator CLARK. Mr. Chairman, I accept that Senator HUMPHREY. I think we ought to make this quite clear. I recognize that the Defense Department has its obligations. However, I am not one who feels that the prominent military leaders of our country, the men of real stature, tend to lead us down the road to militarism. I think we have been supercautious about it. Senator CLARK. Mr. Chairman, I accept what you say, and I am very glad you said it, and I concur in it heartily because I suspect my direct testimony did give a slightly distorted point of view in this respect. I do think it is a remarkable achievement that all of these military people have come behind this plan, and I hope they stay there. Senator HUMPHREY. They will. Senator CLARK. I think it is a great tribute to Mr. McCloy and the President and to the military men themselves, that they have been so willing to endorse the proposal to create this agency, and I am glad you made that comment. I am also glad that you made the comment about the press because I think you are absolutely right. Our Pennsylvania newspapers have been overwhelmingly in support of this measure in their editorial pages and in the news treatment of progress of the bill. Their comments have not been marked by that cynicism to which I made reference a little while ago. I again want to reiterate that I think both the military and the press have given not only fair treatment but splendid cooperation with respect to this legislation. Senator HUMPHREY. One other point, Senator. I have very much, at times, the same feeling as you about some of the comment that is made concerning our efforts in this field of disarmament. However, I am not discouraged at all because one cannot afford to be discouraged in this area. ROLE OF CONGRESS IN SEARCH FOR A JUST AND LASTING PEACE The other point that I think you so properly emphasized is the role of Congress. I think the question which Congress has before it is whether or not the majority view of the American people is for a search for a just and enduring peace. In every single public opinion measurement we have taken, we get indications of the desire for disarmament with at least reasonably effective controls. I think the whole issue is whether that majority view is going to be expressed by the representatives of the people or a noisy, troublesome minority is going to dominate our thinking. One of the great problems of representative government is how a majority really makes itself manifest. And how do you, as you protect the rights of the minority at the same time, exercise the responsibilities of the majority? I am hopeful that the Congress will catch up to the kind of thinking that we have had here at these hearings. We have talked to a number of our colleagues and, I think, in the main, they are in support of this. There are also those who feel, how ever, that the real test of patriotism is whether you can rattle the saber a little louder than somebody else or wave the flag a little higher. Actually, I suppose the greatest patriot of them all would be the one who discovers the path of peace. So I surely want to join in that thought that you have expressed. UNCERTAINTY OF DISARMAMENT ESTABLISHMENT One other point on the ad hoc relationship: We have had a difficult time in keeping people at work in the area of disarmament because of the uncertainty of its establishment. I think that you will agree with me that we have been mighty fortunate that men have been willing to be so sacrificial with their time and energy and talent to undertake these responsibilities. This is surely true of the men who are presently at work, and it is true of some others that I see here in this room who will testify. SENATOR CLARK'S SUGGESTED AMENDMENT Senator, we welcome your suggestions as to the bill, particularly the suggestion as it relates to the matter of world law, and in subsection (1). I am sure that at a time when we are calling to the Soviets to respect law, it might not be a bad idea to pay some tribute to it ourselves. It has always bothered me that a very noisy group of people in America will be very upset about any kind of world law. But the minute the Communists get out of line they are the first to say, "You are breaking the law, you are breaking the agreement." You cannot have it both ways. If you want to be a jungle artist, stick in the jungle. If you want to be in an area of law and order, you have to stay there. DISARMAMENT ACTIVITY IN CONGRESS You will be interested to know, Senator, in reference to subsection (h) of section 31 that the Senate Subcommittee on Disarmament is now completing a nationwide study of the economic consequences of disarmament. We have been in contact with over 280 of our major defense establishments. Information has been gathered and a long questionnaire is now being tabulated with the cooperation of the Department of Defense. We are hopeful that we will be able to make a presentation to Congress and to the executive branch before too many more weeks. Very frankly, I have always been a little concerned about the Congress and its staffing on disarmament activity. We finally got an authorization from the Congress for the appropriation of $400,000 for disarmament studies but it was not easy. We are still operating along the line of a volunteer scoutleader in the field of disarmament study, and I say this in all respect. I think we have two or three people somewhere along the line working on this who are getting paid anywhere from $5,000 to $6,000 a year. This is an amazing contribution on the part of the Government of the United States in the legislative branch, may I say. That is the cynicism that I express for the morning. Thank you, Senator. Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I endorse everything you said. Senator HUMPHREY. Thank you, sir. The next witness is Congressman Kastenmeier from the Second Congressional District of Wisconsin. He has taken the lead in the House of Representatives in the presentation of legislation similar to S. 2180. He has been one of the Members of Congress who has worked very closely in this whole subject of disarmament. Congressman Kastenmeier. STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE SECOND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF WISCONSIN Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to have this opportunity to appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, especially before the distinguished Senator from Minnesota who has contributed so much, to discuss the President's bill to create a U.S. Disarmament Agency for World Peace and Security. You have already heard a great deal of expert opinion about this bill; and there are many far more qualified than I to discuss the intricacies of disarmament research and Government organization. In considering the contribution that I could make to your deliberations, therefore, I thought it might be useful to present something about the growth and realization of the political and legislative idea that we must fill the disarmament research gap. BACKGROUND OF THE PRESENT LEGISLATION It has been my privilege to have participated, since early 1960, in work for legislation to create an "agency of peace" for disarmament research. During this period, I have been impressed by the fact that thinking on this subject has proceeded from two distinct streams and from two distinct groups. I believe that the bill we are considering today can best be understood as the fusion of these separate lines of thought and work. By the summer of 1959 both the Eisenhower administration and leading Democratic spokesmen began to realize that the United States was not adequately prepared to discuss disarmament. The studies. of the State Department in the fall of 1959 led to, among other things, the establishment of a U.S. Disarmament Administration within. the State Department in the fall of 1960. Although the purpose of the USDA was to develop and coordinate U.S. policies in the field of arms limitation and control, the small number of personnel and inadequate financial backing given to it underlined the fact that it was not to be a research agency for disarmament. Rather, the Eisenhower administration's effort in this field may best be termed a first step at setting up a "negotiating center" for disarmament. Though this was certainly a step forward, the USDA's tasks were necessarily limited to the day-to-day, ad hoc, backstopping of negotiations conducted under the authority of the Secretary of State. The growing awareness of the inadequacies of our disarmament effort by Democratic leaders stimulated a somewhat different approach. In the fall of 1959, the Advisory Committee on Science and Technology of the Democratic Advisory Council proposed that a National Peace Agency be created. Such an agency was to have more long-range functions than the "negotiating center" later established by President Eisenhower. Its primary functions would be to provide the thorough research necessary to a full understanding of complex disarmament proposals. Necessarily, its viewpoint would be removed from the day-to-day tumble of the negotiations and it was hoped that a more long-range and thoughtful approach would be generated. The Peace Agency was made public as a formal proposal of the Democratic Advisory Council in December of 1959. At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would ask permission to have inserted in the record "Notes on the Evolution of the Democratic Advisory Council Proposal" prepared by one of those active in the formulation of the proposal, Dr. Ralph E. Lapp. Senator HUMPHREY. Yes, indeed, it will be done. (The document referred to is as follows:) JULY 27, 1961. NOTES ON THE EVOLUTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC ADVISORY COUNCIL PROPOSAL-A NATIONAL PEACE AGENCY (By Dr. Ralph E. Lapp) 1. The idea for an independent Government agency to promote peace is an outgrowth of the work of "the Pasadena group" (led by Trevor Gardner and Harrison Brown, members of the Advisory Committee on Science and Technology of the Democratic Advisory Council). This group was set up at the first meeting of the committee (April 26, 1959) to examine problems of science and technology in relation to U.S. military and foreign policy. 2. The Pasadena group had a series of luncheon meetings during the summer and, as Trevor Gardner recalls, it was at an August meeting that he and Harrison Brown came up with the concept of an agency which would have the responsibility for developing instruments and techniques for implementing international inspection of arms limitations agreements. 3. At the second committee meeting (October 11, 1959) Harrison Brown presented the idea as item 16c: "The establishment of national and international agencies which will engage in and sponsor research aimed at solving the technological problems involved in monitoring and inspecting disarmament agreements." Dr. Pollard, chairman of the committee, called the proposal very important and certainly novel, and found that the committee was unanimous in its endorsement of the concept. 4. The proposal for a peace laboratory became the lead item in a press conference held by the committee at noon, October 11, 1959. Drs. Harold C. Urey and Polykarp Kusch, members of the committee, endorsed the proposal and it received widespread, favorable publicity including front page stories in such newspapers as the New York Times. 5. Trevor Gardner, assisted by Drs. Richard Roberts and McClure presented the proposal before a meeting of the advisory committee on foreign policy, November 16, 1959. Mr. Gardner spent some 2 weeks working on this first draft of the peace agency proposal. 6. Trevor Gardner subsequently revised the first draft of the peace agency proposal, incorporating suggestions and modifications advanced by members of the foreign policy committee. This November 23, 1959, revision was then circulated to members of the science and technology committee for approval. A time limit was set for December 1, 1959, in order that the proposal could be presented to the advisory council on December 5, 1959. 7. By December 1, 1959, 12 members of the committee had approved the proposal, some suggesting modifications, and ultimately all members approved it. Additional suggestions from the director of the council, Charles Tyroler, 2d, from the foreign policy and administrative committees of the council were incorporated in a final revision made on December 1-2 by Dr. Ralph E. Lapp. Additional emphasis was placed upon the aid to underdeveloped countries. 8. The national peace agency proposal was brought up as the first item of business before the advisory council at 9:50 a.m. on Saturday, December 5, 1959 (Jansen Suite, Waldorf Astoria, New York City). Trevor Gardner made a brief presentation explaining the purpose and scope of the proposal. He stressed the scattered and inadequate activities of the U.S. effort in arms limitations inspection and urged that the National Peace Agency be created to "fill an organization hole". Gardner expanded on the value of a laboratory for peace which could undertake extensive research and development along the lines of the 17 items listed in the proposal. He estimated that the new agency would probably follow a budgetary curve similar to that of the U.S. Space Agency. 9. President Truman commented that he had read the paper and that it was "a good statement". Senator Kennedy telephoned the evening before that he could not be present at the morning session but that he approved the statement and wished to be listed as a signer. Governor Harriman suggested that emphasis be placed upon technical aid to underdeveloped countries. After additional discussion, led by Governor Adlai E. Stevenson, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, and Senator Hubert H. Humphrey, and suggested changes, Governor Lehman moved that the proposal be adopted and President Truman seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously carried. 10. Trevor Gardner and Dr. Lapp made the suggested changes in the proposal and the final version was given to the press at noon that day for release to a.m. newspapers (Sunday, December 6, 1959), as a policy statement of the Democratic Advisory Council. Mr. Paul M. Butler and Trevor Gardner held a press conference at the Waldorf Astoria at 12.30 p.m. on Saturday, December 5, 1959. 11. The policy statement received extensive front page coverage in the Sunday newspapers and on TV-radio networks. MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF THE DEMOCRATIC ADVISORY COUNCIL, JUNE 1960 Dr. Ernest C. Pollard, chairman; chairman, biophysics department, Yale University, New Haven, Conn. Dr. Richard B. Roberts, vice chairman; department of terrestrial magnetism, Carnegie Institution, 5241 Broad Branch Road NW., Washington, D.C. Dr. Samuel K. Allison, professor of physics, the Enrico Fermi Institute for Nuclear Studies, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. Dr. Harrison Brown, professor of geochemistry, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif. Dr. James F. Crow, professor of medical genetics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. Dr. Leslie C. Dunn, professor of zoology, Columbia University, New York, N.Y. Dr. Louis B. Flexner, chairman, Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa. Mr. Trevor Gardner, chairman and president, Hycon Manufacturing Co., 815 15th Street NW., Washington, D.C. Dr. H. Bentley Glass, professor of biology, the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. Dr. David L. Hill, consulting physicist, 515 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. Dr. Fritz Lipmann, the Rockefeller Institute, New York, N.Y. Dr. F. T. McClure, chairman, research center, applied physics laboratory, the Johns Hopkins University, Silver Spring, Md. Dr. John S. Toll, chairman, Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, Md. Dr. Harold C. Urey, Institute of Technology and Engineering, University of California, La Jolla, Calif. |