Senator HOLLAND. Call the next witness, please. STATEMENT OF CHARLES E. TWEEDLE, DRY BRANCH, GA., REPRESENTING UNITED WORLD FEDERALISTS OF GEORGIA Senator HOLLAND. Senator Sparkman, will you please take over the committee? Senator SPARK MAN. Be seated, Mr. Tweedle, and proceed in your own way, sir. We are glad to have you with us. Mr. TWEEDLE. Thank you very much. My name is Charles E. Tweedle. I am works manager, Georgia Kaolin Co., and chairman, United World Federalists of Georgia. I am here as a representative of the Georgia branch of the United World Federalists which is a nonpartisan, nonprofit membership organization for the support and strengthening of the United Nations and for such amendments of its charter as will enable it to achieve universal disarmament enforced under adequate safeguards, thus preventing aggression and making possible a world at peace under law. Some 8 years ago when I first became interested in the possibility of the United Nations becoming a kind of organization which could by proper, though limited authority, guarantee a lasting peace and a world free from the brutal horrors and wastes of war, I had little hope that this idea could be anything more than a bare possibility during my lifetime. To realize now, that in such a short time, what seemed only an idea to me 8 years ago has become important enough in the minds of Americans to afford me the privilege of addressing my thinking to high members of our Government, seems very much like a dream or a wish come true. To be able to speak here to men especially charged with the responsibility for probing the thinking of people in this country everywhere so that they, in the discharge of their responsibilities, may reflect what we, the people of this country want done about the opportunity for a United Nations Charter review conference, is an outstanding example of democracy at work. On October 24, 1954, 700 or more people of Macon, Ga., gathered together to honor the United Nations on its birthday. INTEREST OF "GRASSROOTS" IN U. N. The subcommittee should need no stronger evidence to convince it of the considerable and vital interest the "grassroots" people have in the United Nations and their hopes for it. U. N. RESPONSIBILITIES Most of us are willing to admit of the good work accomplished by the United Nations from its inception, but we are also aware that in some ways the United Nations has not been able to fulfill all of the responsibilities we imagined it could adequately discharge. These disappointments, however, have not led us to despair but rather to hope this agent of the peoples of the world for peace, a peace which it has not brought about, can be molded into a world unity of nations and given the additional strength and tools to implement that strength to permit a full and mature growth which then can eliminate war from this world and guarantee for us a lasting peace. The sordid prophecies facing us today in our newspapers, glaring at us from our television screens and screaming at us from our radios, that within 8 or 9 weeks the Far East will be plunged into an atomic war, did not face the founders of the United Nations 10 years ago as they formulated their compromise charter at San Francisco. ENFORCEABLE DISARMAMENT Had there been this kind of urgency, there seems little doubt that the charter would at that time have had written into it the proposition of universal enforceable disarmament under law and individual responsibility and punishment in world courts for any man who made or attempted to again make war. REVIEW CONFERENCE FAVORED In its examination of grassroots opinion, the committee is, of course, asking whether or not I favor a charter review conference and then, if I do, what sort of new charter for the United Nations do I want? From what I've said above, it is evident that I do favor a charter review conference even though there is no assurance that a better charter will result. Last fall, Secretary Dulles announced that the United States would favor holding such a conference. Certainly this should be the atttitude of our great country. In making that statement, I am sure Secretary Dulles could guess no better than I that a more suitable charter could be developed as a result of a review conference, but regardless of the chances of success or failure, the challenge should be met and every effort made to place in debate the questions concerning how to give the United Nations the limited power it needs to prevent war. INADEQUACIES OF PRESENT CHARTER What is wrong with the present charter? 1. It fails to provide for a system of world law limited strictly to matters of arms, aggression and the common security. 2. The paralyzing veto in the Security Council makes it impotent in security matters. 3. It has no way or power to circumvent the veto to set up a United Nations police force. In August 1953, Secretary Dulles pointed out that the charter "reflects serious inadequacies" and one of these was the dependence placed upon men rather than upon law. The late Senator Taft pointed out an important weakness in the U. N. when he underscored that one of its fundamental difficulties was the fact that it was not based on law and an administration of justice under that law. The system of universal enforceable disarmament envisaged by President Eisenhower in his speech of April 16, 1953, cannot be brought about in the face of the weaknesses in the present Ú. N. Charter. Further, without such a system of disarmament, it is impossible, as the President pointed out, to obtain a stable peace. Since men and nations must strive to solve the riddle of how to prevent war, they have had to work on unceasingly without a United Nations that could do it for them, and in their efforts to chart a course of security have had to turn to tired, weak, outmoded diplomacy. One does not need to be a student of history to realize that diplomacy down through the ages has failed to prevent war. What is needed is a bright and new prospect founded on the principle of law now accepted by all of us at every level except at world level. WORLD LAW To me then, this becomes the first and most important required change in the United Nations Charter-specifically, the need for world law, strictly limited to matters of common security, and applicable to each of us as individuals. UNIVERSAL ENFORCEABLE DISARMAMENT We can have little hope for world peace without a system of universal enforceable disarmament. We also realize that no such system can be devised and activated with the United Nations Charter now in existence. We feel strongly that at the charter review conference our Government should take the primary responsibility for proposing ways and means to bring about universal disarmament and to make it workable and foolproof. The achievement of disarmament is not only necessary to a lasting world peace but it is our only means to bring about a reduction in the tremendous cost to our Government and other governments throughout the world necessitated by the headlong arms race now required to give us the small measure of security we feel through our potential to make war if necessary. It is a staggering thought to realize that the cost of past and future wars now constitutes over 85 percent of our national budget. U. N. POLICE FORCE Like any system of law which must be enforced to be effective, any laws pertaining to security at world level would have to be guaranteed through a United Nations police force. There is now no way under the present U. N. Charter to develop such an international police force, and certainly the time has now come when we all should strive to see whether or not it can be brought about. A revision of the U. N. Charter is required to develop this possibility fully, and we hope our Government can bring this question into debate and aid in adjusting the charter to permit the establishment of United Nations forces. U. N. MEMBERSHIP SHOULD BE COMPULSORY Just as Atlanta is a political part of Georgia and Georgia a distinct part of the United States of America with no privilege of withdrawal, so should membership in the United Nations be compulsory once a 42435-55-pt. 8- -3 nation has been admitted to membership. Only in this way can nations accept their full responsibility, one toward another. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE Just as the international rules of the road are recognized in maritime courts throughout the world as the basis of settlement for legal disputes involving the action of ships, so should there be a broader understanding in our other fields which would permit the International Court of Justice to be given a much broader responsibility in those disputes, between nations, which can be decided on a legal basis. The United Nations Charter should be amended to give the International Court the kind of authority it needs to be effective in the field of world security. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would state again that, as a member of the United World Federalists and chairman for this organization for the State of Georgia, our group of some 250 members does favor a charter review conference with emphasis placed on such amendments to the United Nations Charter as will enable it to achieve universal disarmament enforcement under adequate safeguards. As an American, an individual engaged in normal business affairs, as a veteran of World War II and presently an active member of the United States Naval Reserve and as a father, I earnestly subscribe to the principles I have covered in my testimony. There is an urgency about this thing which demands that you and I do something about it-now. Senator SPARKMAN. Thank you, Mr. Tweedle. RELATIONSHIP OF SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION Senator SMITH. This simple question is: Would not the ideas that your organization is advocating call for very far-reaching amendments to the Constitution to the United States, and if they would, do you think the American people are ready to approve these changes at the present time? Mr. TWEEDLE. First of all, Senator Smith, I do not think that the idea is to call for any far-reaching changes in the Constitution of the United States. That is not the idea. We are talking about solely law at world level and solely of matters of disarmament and security, nothing that has to do with our private laws or law at the local level, Federal, State, or local levels. Does that answer your question, sir? Senator SMITH. Well, it gives me your answer. I don't agree with it. I don't think we can make such far-reaching changes without touching the Constitution of the United States. We have had very long debate on it. Mr. TWEEDLE. I don't know that. I don't know much about the law. Senator SMITH. That is all. Senator SPARKMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Tweedle. Our next witness, please. Dean NARMORE. Mrs. Ransom Burts of Atlanta. Senator SPARKMAN. Mrs. Burts. Thank you, Mrs. Burts, we are glad to have you. STATEMENT OF MRS. L. RANSOM BURTS, ATLANTA, GA. Mrs. BURTS. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, and gentlemen, I am Mrs. Ransom Burts of Atlanta, Ga. I am a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution and various other patriotic organizations, but I speak on behalf of myself as a Georgian deeply interested in the affairs of my State and country. When the United Nations organization was formed, its primary purpose was understood to be the discussion of international relations and world problems by representatives of member nations. DOMESTIC AFFAIRS OF NATIONS The objective of seeking to improve world conditions around the council table has now become an octopus reaching into all phases of the domestic affairs of all nations. If continued membership in the United Nations is to be the role of the United States the sovereignty of this Nation must be protected. The chance of success for the organization depends upon that. We are now the strongest nation in the world; encroachment upon our governmental system would lessen our prestige-make us followers instead of leaders. The United States Constitution, article VI, section 2, states in part: * and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land *** TREATY LAW The United Nations Charter was ratified by the Senate of the United States in 1945 as a treaty, and therefore has become the supreme law of this land. There must be an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prevent a recurrence of this. The passage of the Bricker amendment to safeguard us against treaty law is imperative. WORLD GOVERNMENT Any attempt at world government would be disastrous. The many different standards of law, justice, and other interest in the various nations would bring about frictions and irritations between peoples and nations. War would be the result, not peace. If we are to remain a member of the United Nations organization the revised charter should keep our Constitution and Bill of Rights inviolate and should hold no thought of world government. BRICKER AMENDMENT AND ROLE OF SENATE IN TREATY PROCESS Senator HOLLAND (presiding). Mrs. Burts, in connection with the Bricker amendment, and I might say I am sure that is what Mrs. Chapman was referring to, which has just been passed and recommended by the legislative body here in Georgia, I think it is imperative that it be passed at this time. |