milk. They are losing their fear of the outsiders and patiently and willingly are lining up their children for the erstwhile dread innoculations. The incidence and spread of contagious diseases are being cut down. Beside teaching adults the value of milk as a protective food, therefore, UNICEF is using it as a catalyst for expanded child health, nutrition, and welfare programs.

It is our experience that all over the world it is the United States which receives the major credit for the UNICEF programs. Since it is the United States which made possible the existence of the children's fund we are proud of this fact, although we are reminded that 63 other governments have made contributions and that on a per capita basis we are seventh on the list of contributors. From a domestic angle it is our immediate experience that of all international bodies, there does not exist a more popular one among the people of the United States than UNICEF, as soon as our public becomes aware of its existence. This fact is born out most recently by the Tri-City Conference on UNICEF which was held in April in California which resulted in unanimous support for UNICEF by the thousands of prominent citizens of California who participated.

In addition, the conference met with acclaim from the local west coast press which expressed enthusiasm for UNICEF although heretofore it has been indifferent, not to say hostile, to the United Nations as a whole.

Another symptom of how easy it is to enlist public support for the Children's Fund has been evident in the reaction to the Halloween project known as "trick or treats." This was a spontaneous experiment initiated by a Presbyterian church group in Wisconsin to turn children's destructive energy into constructive channels. Instead of asking for pennies for themselves, children ask for pennies for less privileged children in other lands. This project snowballed across the country, and though the financial result was not large, the educational value was great. The effect on the thousands of parents was particularly marked since the first time these adults became aware of an international effort to help other countries develop child-aid programs.

From a political standpoint, we are conscious that forces hostile to the United States are ready to exploit the emotional appeal of the child in need if we fail to bring aid to the child through proven and established channels. This very situation arose in April 1952, at a time when we were delaying on a United States contribution for UNICEF, and the eastern block of European countries convened in Vienna ostensibly to discuss the raising of living standards for the world's children. It is alleged that 60 countries attended this conference and were proselytized with consequent injury to the reputation of our Government.

We felt regret at the last meeting of the executive board of UNICEF in March, when $5 million of new money was allocated for UNICEF programs and this sum included no United States contribution. Because of the fine record achieved by UNICEF, because of the good will we accrue by supporting it, because as parents we do not wish some day to be faced by our children and be accused of letting down our neighbors-whom the time-and space-shrinking inventions of science are bringing practically into our own backyard, for these and many other reasons we believe we should give unqualified endorsement to an extension of UNICEF's mandate. We believe we should implement this endorsement by authorizing for 1954 a contribution recognized by the Congress as an equitable one. It was the intent of the Congress, expressed in legislation by the 82d Congress, that such a contribution does not exceed one-third of the total target budget of allocations. Since the total cost of UNICEF projects comes to $45 million (including internal matching of aided countries) the proportionate share from the United States, therefore, comes to over $14 million.

We take pride in the generally favorable response of the Congress to the work of UNICEF, and are certain that our Congress shares our belief that it is in the best interests of the United States to give vigorous leadership in this moving

cause.

STATEMENT OF AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN IN SUPPORT OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL CHILDREN'S WELFARE WORK

In behalf of the American Association of University Women, the international relations committee of the association strongly urges passage of the MSA Extension Act, which authorizes an item of $9 million earmarked for international child welfare work, as well as the passage of the deficiency appropriations bill for UNICEF involving the sum of $9,814,000.

Careful study of the UNICEF Executive Board's report of March 19, 1953 convinces us that the work of the Emergency Fund must continue. Our conviction is based on the following considerations:

1. The emergency for which the fund was created has not ended. In a recently published statement, Maurice Pate, Executive Director of UNICEF, said: "What struck me most forcefully on a recent trip to Asia was this: Disease among children there today constitutes a greater emergency than the devastated areas of Europe after the war."

2. There is no channel less partisan than UNICEF for the relief of the needs of children, just as there is no area of any society less partisan and less political than the lives of its children. The sincerity of United States devotion to the humanitarian principles governing its domestic life can best be demonstrated on the international level through the channel of the United Nations Fund. 3. United States failure to subscribe to UNICEF can but lead to misunderstanding abroad. If the wealthiest Nation of the world begins an economy drive by withdrawing its support from UNICEF, that Nation can anticipate the scorn and the suspicion of the rest of the world. To forfeit international respect and goodwill in order to save a sum less than $20 million is to indulge in false economy. 4. No United Nations agency or affiliate has a more impressive list of concrete accomplishments to its credit, but many of the children for whom the fund was set up in 1946 are now adults, and the relief of their needs cannot alleviate those of their successors.

Both because humanitarian considerations require it and because the reputation of the United States for international probity demands it, we beg the immediate passage of the aforesaid appropriations bills for UNICEF and for international child welfare work.

ANNE GARY PANNELL, Chairman.

MARGARET M. BALL.

BARBARA EVANS.

ELIZABETH L. FACKT.

LUCILE DEEN PINKHAM.

MINNIE MILLER.

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT EXTENSION

TUESDAY, MAY 26, 1953

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

STATE DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION AND PERSONNEL,

Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met in room G-3, United States Capitol, at 9:45 a. m., Hon. John M. Vorys (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. VORYS. The subcommittee will come to order. The meeting was called while I was out of town, but at my suggestion, by Mr. Morton. We will have the statement of Under Secretary of State, Mr. Lourie.

STATEMENT OF HON. DONALD B. LOURIE, UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. LOURIE. It is about SRE.

Mr. VORYS. I believe you have met Mr. Bentley.

Mr. LOURIE. I believe Mr. Merchant can start off and give you the story much more thoroughly than I.

STATEMENT OF HON. LIVINGSTON MERCHANT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EUROPEAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. MERCHANT. What we wanted to explain is the reorganization of SRE in Paris. The SRE, in its present form, was created by administrative action last January or February. At the time of the reorganization of the NATO setup, which was accomplished at the Lisbon meeting of the North Atlantic Council in February 1952, there was abolished the Council of Deputies which had been sitting in London, and created in its stead a Council of Permanent Representatives with headquarters in Paris and a staff under Lord Ismay as Secretary General.

The members of the Council were asked to designate governmental representatives to be in permanent session. The SRE, therefore, represented the merger of Ambassador Spofford's shop in London with the regional office of the MSA, which had been set up at the time Mr. Harriman had the ambassadorship created under the first ECA Act.

By letter of appointment from the President, Ambassador Draper, who had been appointed to the MSA membership, was designated as the United States permanent representative on the Council.

The office of the SRE was set up, and is still set up, with three main operating divisions; the Political Section, which is staffed by the Department of State, which provides political and policy advice to the special representative, and the staff for the Council meetings; the Economic Section, which was the old OSR-MSA regional economic office, which provides the backing of Ambassador Draper as United States representative on the OEEC and discharges the regional responsibilities of the defense assistance phase of the mutual security program; and the Office of Defense, which is staffed by personnel from the Department of Defense and which is concerned with certain of the defense aspects abroad, including offshore procurement, infrastructure, and so forth.

The form that the proposed reorganization will take is to strip the office in Paris of the functions which are not directly related to United States representation on regional international bodies with their headquarters in Europe. It is proposed that the two ambassadorships provided for under the MSA Act would be abolished, and that the Secretary of State, under the authority of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, would establish a diplomatic mission in Paris, the chief of which would have the rank of ambassador in his capacity as United States permanent representative on the North Atlantic Council. He would report to the Secretary of State in contradistinction to the present terms of reference for Ambassador Draper, under which he reports to four members of the Cabinet as well as to the President. He would also serve as the United States representative on the Ministerial Council of the OEEC, and he would discharge such other representational functions to multilateral organizations as were delegated and assigned to him. He would have three principal advisers or assistants nominated by other departments or agencies. There would be 1 appointed by Governor Stassen, as his economic adviser or deputy, 1 appointed by Secretary Wilson for defense affairs, and 1 appointed by Secretary Humphrey for such responsibilities as the Treasury had in that general field.

The chief of this new mission would be the only one in the organization with the rank of Ambassador. He would be concerned only with representation on international multilateral bodies in Europe. He would have no supervisory or coordinating responsibilities as regard the country teams. He would deal only through our Ambassador to a particular country, except insofar as he was dealing through, say, the French representative on the North Atlantic Council on matters arising in the Council itself.

I think that is enough of a sketch. It fills in the main points.

STATEMENT OF HON. THRUSTON B. MORTON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR CONGRESSIONAL RELATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. MORTON. I think it ought to be pointed out that the function as Regional Administrator for MSA, which has been a part of the phase in Draper's shop, will not be a part of the new mission.

STATEMENT OF HON. C. TYLER WOOD, DEPUTY TO THE DIRECTOR FOR MUTUAL SECURITY

Mr. Wood. I don't think I have anything to add. I think one of the products of this reorganization is expected to be a very considerable decrease in the size of the organization. The organization is pointed toward this multilateral representation, rather than toward the supervision, as it has been in the past, of the country teams.

Mr. MORTON. What is your net reduction? It is pretty high, is it not?

Mr. MERCHANT. Yes, from over 700 a year ago. It is not thought that this reorganization would affect David Bruce in his present capacity.

Mr. VORYS. Has the person been selected yet?

Mr. MERCHANT. John Hughes, whose name you may have seen in the papers, is the one who is in the process. I brought along a functional chart of the office as it now is.

Mr. BENTLEY. This is the present setup?

Mr. MERCHANT. It gives the internal structure of the shop.

Mr. BENTLEY. Do you know what the personnel decrease would be, approximately?

Mr. MERCHANT. No, sir; I don't know numerically. It would be substantial. My impression is that it is a little over 500, and it is in the process of being cut. My impression is that with the cuts already instituted it is in the process of going down to about 450. That is in comparison with the figure that I recall of a little over 700 when the various organizations were put together a year ago last March.

In addition to the above personnel, there is a staff in SRE, paid from program funds, carrying on productivity and technical assistance programs on April 30, 1953, this staff numbered 91.

Mr. BENTLEY. Does this follow along the lines, Mr. Merchant, of several of the recommendations I saw in the team evaluation setup? Mr. MERCHANT. The only one I have read, sir, is the overall one of the teams. I think it is in substantial agreement.

Mr. WOOD. Several of the evaluation reports made the specific recommendation that the office be changed from one having supervisory responsibilities over European aid operations to one primarily responsible for representing the United States multilateral organizations. They also said there were too many Ambassadors in Paris. In both those respects, this reorganization is very definitely moving in the direction proposed in the report.

A third recommendation was based on the belief of the teams that the office was too large and that there were too many Americans in Paris. In that respect, also, the reorganization is in line with these recommendations. Finally, there was a considerable amount of opinion among the evaluation teams that the work in the regional office should be more directly under the Secretary of State. In that respect, also, since this man will report to the Secretary of State, I think it may fairly be said that the change moves in the direction of the recommendations of the evaluation team.

Mr. BENTLEY. This person's new job in Paris would be somewhat similar to that of Mr. Lodge's in New York, as far as representation in the multilateral organizations and reporting to the Secretary; am I correct on that?