discussing this same general subject-in Italy the problem essentially is political in that Premier De Gasperi, who is whole heartedly in favor of the EDC as is his entire Cabinet, was unable, due to a filibuster by the Communists in the Senate, to secure ratification by either house before dissolution in anticipation of the national elections which will be held in Italy on June 7 and 8.

There is a constitutional requirement that, I believe it is 20 days, which must elapse after the results of the election are known before the 2 Houses can vote. There will then be, of course, the problem of securing confirmation of the Cabinet, the new Government, and there are certain necessary fiscal bills which must be dealt with at the outset of the session. Nevertheless, we have been assured that the first substantive piece of business considered by both Houses when they assemble will be action on ratification of the EDC treaty.

In Germany and France, as all of you are aware, there are difficulties. There have been a number of obstacles, some of which have already been successfully surmounted. The 6 so-called protocols or agreed interpretations to the treaty have now been approved by all 6 governments and what at one time promised to be real difficulty in 1 or 2 countries at least has been satisfactorily resolved.

In Germany, as you know, the Chancellor received a setback in the Bundesrat 2 or 3 weeks ago when it was voted 20 to 18 that the treaty should not be considered until after the constitutional question which had been raised was settled.

The Chancellor remains confident that he can in the reasonably near future secure the necessary parliamentary action to ratify insofar as Germany is concerned both the EDC treaty and the contractual agree

ment.

He has not yet divulged the exact parliamentary tactics and strategy upon which he plans to proceed from this point on.

We must recognize the difficulty that does exist as a practical matter in Germany in the form of the approaching German elections. The date has not been set but constitutionally they have to be held not later than September and as in Germany, the Government moves into the atmosphere of an approaching election. As is understandable, should the criticisms of the opposition become more heated and more pointed?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. WOOD. To summarize, I would say that we have by no means seen all of the hurdles surmounted. Progress is being made, and we will continue to operate on the assumption that without undue delay, the European Defense Community will come into force.

As you saw undoubtedly from the announcement on Monday, the deputies for the negotiation of the Austrian treaty meeting in London on May 27-and invitations have gone out for that meeting to the Soviet. This is a matter which President Eisenhower in his April 16 speech placed high on the list of concrete situations where, if concrete constructive action was taken by the Soviet Union, we would have tangible evidence of a genuine desire on their part to contribute to a relaxation of tensions.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. WOOD. I might also say a word or two on the negotiations in

As you know, for over a year we have been negotiating with the Spanish Government on a complex of three interrelated agreements, the first being an agreement for economic assistance following the form which has been negotiated with other countries which have been beneficiaries of our defense support programs; the second being the more or less standard MDAP agreement under which military end item assistance can be provided, and the third a so-called base agreement with the necessary technical annexes.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. Wood. Those negotiations, as you all well know, have been slow and they have been difficult. This has been the first time that we have been discussing these matters with the Spanish Government which, of course, is in contrast with the history of some years of the development of these relationships with allies in NATO.

In the last few weeks, there has been very encouraging progress in those negotiations. They are today in what can be called an extremely advanced stage-in fact, sufficiently advanced to have resulted in the executive branch having recalled to Washington for consultation about 10 days ago Ambassador Dunn, Major General Kissner and George Train of MSA, who had been the negotiating team in Madrid. The next stage of tactics for the next phase of the negotiations are under intensive study at the Cabinet level within the executive branch.

I think that is all, sir, that I had in mind.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Whom do you wish to have testify now? Mr. WOOD. Major General Stewart, who is the Director, Office of Military Assistance, Office of the Secretary of Defense.

I believe the general prefers to stand. He has a few charts which I believe will speed the situation. He will speak generally about the development of the program for a brief moment and that will be followed by Dr. FitzGerald and then we can take up the country-bycountry story, Mr. Chairman.

STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. GEORGE C. STEWART, OFFICE OF MILITARY ASSISTANCE, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

General STEWART. Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Kelly and gentlemen, I have here a brief description of the manner in which this program has been developed. I am informed that there are members of this committee who were not here last year and I would like very much, in order to explain how it works, to take a few minutes to describe this process, if I may, sir.

I have been in the Army since I was 17 years old and learned long ago that whenever you get a job, any task, that the first thing that you have to find out is what your mission is. If you do not know that, you get mixed up as you go along and you get off the track.

I sought my mission in relation with this assignment and I arrived at the conclusion that the basic, broad mission was a statement contained in the MSA Act of 1951. I have used that as my broad guidance in everything I have done. That mission is to maintain the security and promote the foreign policy and provide for the general welfare of the United States by furnishing assistance to friendly nations in the interests of international peace and security.

All that we do is related back to that basic policy.

(A chart was shown entitled, "Organization for Military Assistance, North Atlantic Treaty Countries," as follows:)

General STEWART. There is the authorization in the act itself. I would like to restrict the area I am responsible for by briefly pointing out the overall area.

There are three broad types of foreign aid in existence, without the breakdown of the details. First we have the Mutual Security Agency which for descriptive purposes is the agency that carries out the economic assistance.

You have the technical assistance to underdeveloped countries that is under the State Department, and you have the military assistance which is under the Department of Defense.

Over all three of these types of aid sits the Director of Mutual Security charged with the coordination and direction of all types of foreign assistance.

My area and all that I shall talk about is military assistance which is in H area here [indicating].

Now the basic unit in the organization for military assistance is a Military Assistance Advisory Group that we place in each country receiving grant assistance from us. That is a group of Army, Navy, and Air Force people who sit in the country under the bilateral agreement we make with the country and who are a part of the Ambassador's team. On technical matters they deal directly with the Ambassador and he is always informed of what they do.

Except in Europe, these teams report directly back to Washington. They report on technical matters directly to their own service and on certain other matters to my office.

In the case of Europe we have a regional headquarters between the MAAG itself-we call these MAAG's-and Washington. That headquarters is located in General Ridgway's headquarters in his capacity as United States commander and not in his capacity as the international commander.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. General, I do not want to interrupt you but I would like to have you define terms like MAAG as you go along. When this report goes out to the country they ought to have the information on those initials.

General STEWART. DMS-the Director of Mutual Security; MSAMutual Security Agency; OSD-the Office of the Secretary of Defense; JCS-the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the three military departments, Navy, Army, and Air Force.

USCINCEUR-the commander in chief of the United States forces in Europe, General Ridgway, and General Handy acting as his deputy.

SHAPE-Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers, Europe.

NAC-The North Atlantic Council; and SRE-the Special Representative in Europe.

These, I think, are perfectly clear.

MAAG is the Military Assistance Advisory Group.

Now in the case of Europe, the coordination with SHAPE, the North Atlantic Council, and the Special Representative, Europe, Mr. Draper, is achieved by this division of General Handy's headquarters. In the case of other countries, as I have said, the MAAG's report back to Washington directly.

(A chart was shown entitled, "MDAP, MAAG Location," as follows:)