postwar conditions anticipated at San Francisco were not being realized. The failure of concerted action by the major allies rendered it necessary for the United States Government to attempt to create the desired postwar conditions in cooperation with other States willing to do so.

It became progressively clearer that serious misconceptions prevailed in the minds of the leaders of the Soviet Union concerning western civilization and the possibilities for developing stabilized working relations between the Soviet Union and the other members of the community of nations. It is a misconception to suppose that domination of the world by a single system is inevitable. It is a misconception to suppose that differing systems cannot live side by side in peace under the basic rules of international conduct prescribed by the Charter of the United Nations. These rules are obligatory upon all members.

A fundamental task of the United Nations and of our foreign policy is to dispel the misconceptions of the Soviet leaders and to bring about a more realistic view of what is possible and what is impossible in the relationship between the Soviet Union and the world at large. In this way there can be restored to international society the equilibrium necessary to permit the United Nations to function as contemplated at San Francisco.

Our realization of the need for this equilibrium has led to action. along several lives, all designed to create conditions favorable to the working of the United Nations. The first necessary step was to insure the freedom and independence of the members. The ability of democratic peoples to preserve their independence in the face of totalitarian threats depends upon their determination to do so. That determination in turn depends upon the development of a healthy economic and political life and a genuine sense of security.

Therefore, the United States Government is responding to requests. to provide the economic assistance to various countries in Europe and elsewhere. The United States is cooperating with 16 European countries in a recovery program providing for self-help and mutual aid.

The United States Government is now considering the steps necessary to bring the National Military Establishment to the minimum. level necessary to restore the balance-of-power relationships required for international security.

The United States is acutely aware that the return of a sense of security to the free nations of the world is essential for the promotion of conditions under which the United Nations can function. The necessary steps for self-protection against aggression can be taken within the Charter of the United Nations. The Charter recognizes in article 51 the right of individual and collective self-defense against armed attack until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to preserve peace and security. Articles 52, 53, and 54 provide for regional arrangements dealing with the maintenance of international peace and security, on condition that such arrangements are consistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter.

In recognition of the possibility foreseen in the Charter that an armed attack might occur upon a member of the United Nations, despite the binding obligations accepted by every member to refrain from the threat or use of force against another State, the United States

and the other American Republics concluded at Rio de Janeiro last year a treaty for individual and collective self-defense. Certain countries of western Europe likewise have organized themselves into a western union, for their individual and collective self-defense. By such arrangements under article 51 of the Charter and the articles providing for regional arrangements, constructive steps have been taken to bulwark international security and the maintenance of peace. Our intention to afford encouragement and support to arrangements made by free nations for the preservation of their independence and liberty has already been stated by the President in his message to the Congress on March 17.

The United States Government has followed an active policy of strengthening the existing machinery of the United Nations.

1. We have endeavored to assure that the United Nations would carry out its responsibilities in dealing with the dangerous political issues which have arisen in various quarters of the world. We have sought to promote its basic work on economic problems, human rights, freedom of information, health, and related needs.

2. We have made proposals toward restraining the use of the veto in the Security Council and reducing the scope of the veto through its elimination from matters of pacific settlement and the admission of new members.

3. We proposed the establishment of an interim committee of the General Assembly, popularly known as the Little Assembly, to consider various possibilities for improving international cooperation and to put to work the undeveloped powers of the General Assembly in the field of international security. By means of this committee the farreaching influence of the General Assembly is being brought more effectively to bear in fulfilling the purposes and principles of the Charter.

The United Nations is the forum of daily world negotiation. It is the world's vehicle for dealing with basic economic and social maladjustments, for developing safeguards of essential freedoms, for advancing the development of dependent peoples and areas.

On several occasions negotiation in the United Nations, even during its short history, has postponed fighting long enough to remove the cause for fighting. It is a forum of negotiation where charges or distortions are held answerable, where violations of treaty obligations nust meet the verdict of world opinion, and where those responsible must answer for their conduct. It is a forum where the nations of the world are called upon to uphold the purposes and principles of the Charter. United Nations negotiation affords continuing working contects in international relations and an open door to communication between the east and the west.

A number of projects designed to improve international conditions by rew forms of international organization have been proposed. These projects envisage radical changes in the existing United Nations Charte". Some propose the elimination of a veto on enforcement measures, the establishment of inequality of voting among the major powers, and the virtual elimination of the influence of small nations in Secuity Council decisions. Others go beyond the revision of the United Nations Charter and call for the establishment of new forms of intertional structure along the lines of world government. In general,

the proponents of these projects recognize the probability that the proposals would not be accepted by at least one of the major powers and by a number of other governments now members of the United Nations. They advocate that in this case the respective projects be put into effect among such nations as would accept them.

All of these projects appear to rest on the assumption that the present unsatisfactory state of world affairs is a result of inability on the part of the United Nations to prevent aggression; that this inability arises from the exercise of the veto power in the Security Council and the lack of a United Nations police force; that if the veto power on enforcement decisions could be removed and the United Nations provided with armed forces, aggression could be prevented; and that the principal barrier to world peace would thereby cease to exist. The general assumption rests, I think, on an incomplete analysis of our main problems of foreign policy at this juncture and of the part which international organization can play in solving them.

The underlying problem in the immediate future is to bring about the restoration of economic, social, and political health in the world and to give to the peoples of the world a sense of security which is essential for them to carry on the task of recovery. What is needed for the achievement of a world order based on law and dedicated to peace and progress is a widespread improvement in the material and social well-being of the peoples of the world. The responsibility for such improvement will always rest primarily upon the peoples and governments themselves. In this field the United Nations, however, can play an increasingly active role.

The factor of military strength is of immediate and major importance in the present world situation but is not the element which will be paramount in long run. The emphasis often placed solely on the military aspects of world affairs does a disservice to the cause of peace. The more that present differences are talked about and treated exclusively as a military problem, the more they tend to become so.

The problems today presented to those who desire peace are not questions of structure. Nor are they problems solvable merely by new forms of organization. They require performances of obligations already undertaken, fidelity to pledges already given. Basic human frailties cannot be overcome by Charter provisions alone, for they exist in the behavior of men and governments.

The suggestion 'hat a revised United Nations, or some form of world government, should be achieved, if necessary, without those nations which would be unwilling to join, deserves special attention. Such a procedure would probably destroy the present United Nations organization. The result would be a dispersal of the community or nations. followed by the formation of rival military alliances and isolated groups of States. This result would weaken us and expose us to even greater dangers from those who seek domination of other States.

It is not changes in the form of international intercourse which we now require. It is to changes of substance that we must look for an improvement of the world situation. And it is to those changes of substance that our policy has been directed. When the substance of the world situation improves, the United Nations will be able to function with full effectiveness. Meanwhile we will continue our efforts in cooperation with other governments to improve the working of the United Nations under the Charter.

75921-48- -4

The United Nations was created after years of study and after months of difficult negotiations. It now has 58 members. It is the symbol of the aspirations of mankind. Its success is the hope of mankind. All new efforts to attain order and organization in the affairs of men require time to grow roots in the loyalties of men. The history of our own people testifies to this necessity. Let us not in bur im patience and our fears sacrifice the hard-won gains that we now possess in the United Nations organization.

Chairman EATON. Mr. Secretary, there is one particular issue before our committee upon which we desire your views. That is the agreement entered into between our Government and the United Nations for the loan of $82,000,000 [sic, $65,000,000] to build the new building.

Secretary MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, I think it is highly desirable that the loan be authorized, not only on the basis of the dollar factor from a purely business point of view, but also because of the fact that we invited the United Nations to establish headquarters in this country. I think we should consider that point in reaching a decision regarding this particular financial proposal.

I would say, Mr. Chairman, that our delegate to the United Nations, Ambassador Austin, who will be here this afternoon, knows all of the details in this matter and will be prepared to answer in a less superficial fashion than I can.

Chairman EATON. Thank you.

We will begin with the 5-minute rule, and after that throw it open. Mr. Chiperfield.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. Mr. Secretary, do I reach a proper conclusion from your remarks that you feel at the present time it would be ineffective to call a general conference of the members of the United Nations for the purpose of reviewing the present Charter under article 109?

Secretary MARSHALL. That is correct; yes, sir.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. I feel sure, Mr. Secretary, if you felt we could revise and improve the Charter of the United Nations, you would have arranged such a conference and would not be waiting for Congress to pass a resolution requesting you to do so. However, even though you feel that calling a conference under article 109 would not be effective, that would not preclude, would it, going ahead under article 51, article 52, and so forth, for regional arrangements that might strengthen the position within the framework of the United Nations?

Secretary MARSHALL. That is correct, sir. We are constantly endeavoring to improve the procedural arrangements. Several of our proposals were given approval at the meeting of the Assembly last fall, notably the proposal for the Little Assembly. This Little Assembly is considering some of the problems discussed so frequently in the public press at present.

We are not opposed to amendment of the Charter in principle. If the proposed amendment had the following characteristics, we would be able to support it: That it genuinely strengthens and facilitates the work of the United Nations; that it is strongly supported by the Congress and the American people with full knowledge of its implications for the United States-that is a very important condition, and I repeat it: That it is strongly supported by the Congress and

the American people, with full knowledge of its implications for the United States-and that negotiation with other governments indicates that there is reasonable support for it in the United Nations.

We feel we must not disrupt the work of the United Nations nor should we at this time go beyond the existing amendment procedure. Some changes would be useful immediately and we have already indicated that some of them might be

A change in the veto arrangement: We are working on that right now, and with the pressure of world opinion, we hope to get some adjustment there.

A change in the rules for admitting new members: That also relates to the veto question.

Minor drafting changes which would clarify the present Charter: One example is in article 27, paragraph 3. It would be useful if the last part could read, "Provide that in decisions. under chapter VI and under paragraph 3 of article 52, a party to a dispute"-there insert two additional words: "or situation," "shall abstain from voting."

We are continually studying the Charter and proposals for amendments because we know that changes will be desirable as our experience with the Charter grows and our work with the United Nations goes forward.

Calling for a convention to revise the Charter should be the last. step and not the first step. We would first have to know what is needed and then negotiate it with others.

I would, however, like to go back to the point I have already repeated: We feel that any amendment must be strongly supported by the Congress and the American people with a full knowledge of its implications to the United States. I might say here, sir, that I think there is possibly much confusion in the public mind as to just what the proposals before us would do, and to what extent we would commit ourselves under them.

A two-thirds vote is certainly a good rule of democracy on very important questions, but when it comes to the use of the power of the United States in a military way-particularly having in mind that we possess about 40 percent of the power and influence you might say, in the world today-we must be very careful as to what the American people are committing themselves. That problem involves certain conditions of the veto.

I was interested in looking into our own Constitution to refresh my mind on the fact that we have in it a veto power which nobody ever discusses. It relates to the representation of States in the Senate. Any one State can veto a change.

By some of the proposals that have been made regarding the Security Council, we would be changing the voting power, even among the five great powers, by reducing the representation of two of them to one vote each, and three of them, including ourselves, two votes each, and reducing the representation of the smaller States to only two with one vote each.

I cannot believe that the smaller States would agree to such a change as that. I do not believe that the French and Chinese Governments would accede to that proposal, and I am reminded of our own veto power in article V of the Constitution with respect exactly to that procedure in relation to representation in the Senate.