Изображения страниц

I believe the American people want the United Nations to succeed. I believe they are bitterly disappointed that their dreams of peace have not yet been realized ; also, that they are prepared to sacrifice heavily to forward the realization. Long ago we came to understand that a minority voice, or even a single voice, in the UN councils has become the vote that has stopped action, and we want obstructive tactics checkmated. It will not be done except with a new arming of public opinion within the Council. So we suggest a new strengthening of the voice and the judgment and the power of UN—the voice by creation of a new agreement that prevents negation by a single vote; the judgment by a new majority opinion that will overrule; the power by a new UN police force that contains world-wide and volunteer elements of strength.

How much better it is to do this within existing framework than to abandon what has gone before and start anew. It can be done. The scheme already suggested by my most distinguished colleagues, revises and supplements work that starated in 1920 under President Wilson, for which at that time the world was not ready, but which now is being earnestly prayed for all over the worldeven I believe in the minds of the downtrodden little Russians. It says to aggressors and to those who believe in ruthless domination over the will of the people "Thou shalt not."

I earnestly commend the plan to the administration. It is a prerequisite to any plan for the rebabilitation of western Europe for fear of consequences of failure must be changed to hope of success; it takes advantage of the knowledge of the workings of international agreements that we have painfully acquired over the past years; it is practical and offers cooperation all over the world.

And if it does not work fully, if nevertheless we are committed to heavy material expense, we can know that the free hand of fellowship has been offered and rejected, and it will put the heavy finger of moral responsibility for peace on the one nation that refuses—and it can say without shadow of doubt : “Thou art the man."

But it will work; it does give hope to a despairing world; it costs us less; it gives us more; it echoes in firm and practical thought these significant words of Benjamin Franklin on the day that our own United States came into being, March 4, 1789: "God grant that not only the love of liberty but a thorough knowlelge of the rights of man may pervade all the nations of the earth so that a philosopher may set his foot anywhere on its surface and say "This is my country,''

Chairman EATON. The next witness is Mr. Burke, of Ohio.

[ocr errors]



Mr. BURKE. On March 16 I was privileged to join with a number of my colleagues in introducing House Concurrent Resolution 168. Its purpose, that of revising the United Nations Charter so that certain defects now existing might be corrected, is well known. Its objective is the elimination of suspicion and fear and the insertion of confidence that can make the organization a more effective instrument of peace.

Specifically, the resolution calls for the elimination of the veto power in matters of aggression, armament for aggression, and admission for membership. Also, as you are aware, it recommends active prevention of armament for aggression. In addition, it urges the establishment of an effective world police force to consist of one international contingent as an active force, and five national contingents operating as reserves when needed. The international contingent would come under the direct control of the Security Council and would consist of volunteers recruited exclusively from citizens of the small member nations. The armed forces of the five major powers, acting as rese:ves, would be available to the international contingent only on special matters of aggression and the active preparedness for aggression.

I have maintained from the start that the United Nations must be encouraged and strengthened if it is to become an international solvent for world problems. It must not, in other words, become ineffective and weak as did its predecessor, the League of Nations. For this reason, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to recommend for your serious consideration the passage of House Concurrent Resolution 168.

I have been interested in this whole matter of the United Nations or the League of Nations almost from its inception back in 1919 or 1920 when it was not fashionable to be interested in it.

I should like to state that I think it is imperative that the United Nations be made to work.

I would like to call your attention, as a matter of basic faith in that statement, to something that is not usually brought out. That is the matter of the advance of military invention in the world today.

The great progress of freedom in the last 400 years has been made largely because the masses of people could throw off tyranny.

We are back today in the same position that the people were in the days of the feudal lords; with the invention of gunpowder and the development of firearms, people could throw off tyranny. Today, revolutions have to occur within the armies. It is impossible for a nation, once having lost its freedom, to regain it, in all probability, unless it is by force from the outside.

It therefore seems to me that that is one of the fundamental, basic reasons why we should advance this cause of the United Nations. It is imperative, it seems to me.

À dictator is one who is not easily done away with these days. It is next to impossible, as we have seen, in some countries.

I have nothing further to add to the discussion of the mechanics or the modus operandi, that you have been talking about here. It has been very finely covered.

Chairman Eaton. We appreciate your being here, Mr. Burke, Mr. Hale, and the others.

The Chair would like to express to Mr. Judd his personal thanks for the very fine work Dr. Judd did in getting the witnesses together for this important meeting this morning. I think this has been one of the most illuminating and educating sessions our committee has had for a long time.

Thank you, Dr. Judd.

The meeting will stand adjourned now until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock, when the Secretary of State will be the first witness: and in the afternoon Ambassador Austin will be the witness on behalf of the United Nations.

(The following communications have been submitted for inclusion in the record :)


Modesto, Calif., May 6, 1948. The COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

The mouse of Representatives. HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE: Apropos of House Concurrent Resolu. tions 59, 72, 163, and 176, the World Peace and Brotherhood Mission, composed of 90 ministers and laymen, representing over 100,000 people of 12 denominations and 14 States, submits the following testimony. We have journeyed from the west coast and the Middle West to Washington in order to work for a Christian approach to our foreign policy.

We favor an exploratory conference along the lines of House Concurrent Resolution 59 for the purpose of considering steps acceptable to all nations whereby the United Nations would become more effective in enacting, interpreting, and enforcing world law.

We favor the immediate granting of the $65,000,000 interest-free loan for the building of the permanent headquarters of the United Nations. This would indicate something of our American support for our world organization,

We favor immediate entrance into the World Health Organization and the International Relief Organization as two means of increasing our cooperation with the United Nations.

We urge that it be the policy of our Nation to use the agencies of the United Nations more fully in all matters of international nature.

In lieu of the armaments quotas proposed in House Concurrent Resolution 163, we propose that the Security Council take steps to accomplish the complete elimination of all national armaments. We believe that the further building up of national armies will greatly weaken rather than strengthen the United Nations.

We propose that the Security Council establish an international police force, made up of volunteers recruited exclusively from the citizens of the smaller member states and carefully trained as an international constabulary. We believe that prompt procedure of this character would greatly decrease the present fear and insecurity in the world. It would also permit the redirection of billions of dollars now going into armaments into constructive channels making for the improved health, housing, education, and feeding of peoples in our own land and abroad.

ANDREW JUVINALL, Representative of the World Peace and Brotherhood Mission.


NATIONAL WOMAN'S CHRISTIAN TEMPERANCE UNION The National Woman's Christian Temperance Union has never been unqualifiedly in favor of the United Nations Charter. We have always felt it was overloaded to favor power politics, was top-heavy and unworkable. We testified in its behalf reluctantly and with reservations, because it was the only vehicle offered through which there was a possibility that international understanding might be reached, and we so stated in our testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. We said then that we felt something might be accomplished by providing a conference table around which the nations of the world might sit and exchange ideas and become acquainted with one another.

We have been agreeably surprised at the success which this conference table exchange of ideas has attained in the General Assembly. The joint concensus of opinion of the nations of the world has, it appears, that same saving sense of morality, justice, fair play, and ultimate values that characterizes everywhere the mass thinking of the people when it is allowed to function undisturbed by induced hysteria. It is this foundation of sound sense that has underlain and kept intact the institutions of freedom in this our Government "of the people, by the people, and for the people” in spite of the onslaughts from all sides of many selfish interests.

We feel that UN has proved itself. It is hamstrung and hobbled by the many artificial restraints with which it has been hampered by the provisions of the Charter, but we are willing to trust to its sense of justice the important decisions on world policy which must be made, and we feel the time has come to loose it from its swaddling bands.

Chief among its hampering restrictions is the veto power whose unrestricted use has almost brought about the complete destruction of its effectiveness. We believe these bills, House Concurrent Resolution 163, through House Concurrent Resolution 176 are a step in the right direction. It is imperative that an international police force which would be available to enforce its decisions be set up, and we believe that its early establishment would lead to the settlement of many disputes whose existence now threatens the peace of the world, and that it would be a definite means of averting war, far more effective than unilateral threats and shows of force on our part could ever be.

We hope the committee will favorably consider these bills and report them out at an early date. It would be constructive action, and a real attempt to get at the heart of our international problem.


For the past 3 years the vast majority of mankind has ardently longed for the success of the organization that was set up in San Francisco that optimistically inserted the word “United" before the word "Nations" to form its official title, hoping against hope that it might bring "peace on earth, good will among men."

I appreciate the invitation of your chairman to express a few thoughts that have come to me as to why it is that the United Nations has not succeeded in bringing forth the much desired unity among the nations of the world. The immediate question before mankind today is whether to try to amend the charter of that organization, so as to make it effective for the purpose intended, or to try to create a new organization-either along different lines or similar ones, on the same or on a wider and saner basis—with the announced objective of bringing into existence the answer to the prayers of all people for a cessation from both needless wars and needless poverty, for I submit, as the first point I would like to make, that those two subjects are but different aspects of the same over-all problem.

During these 3 years the emphasis has been placed correctly upon the need for an organization to bring peace however arrived at—but chiefly by planning to transfer the responsibility for the use of armaments for the defense of in dividual nations or groups of nations to an over-all organization of nations-of all nations if possible in the belief that from then on a world police force must do for all of the people of the world as world citizens that which their respective nations or groups can no longer establish for them as national citizens.

That emphasis on peace among nations, as something possible of attainment separate and apart from the attainment of prosperity for the individuals com posing those nations, must now be shifted or widened.

From now on, in the minds of men everywhere, the desirability of peace among nations must be associated with the desirability of attaining peace of mind any for individuals on other phases of security apart from that connected with armet combat. The cessation of war is not in itself a complete thing unless it bring: to the individual the chance for the prosperity and happiness that supposedl; accompanies peaceful conditions.

The goal to be aimed at from now on is not so much the uniting of nation: (and in a "united nations” organization of appointees) as the uniting of individu als of the earth in an over-all government (of the people of the planet, by th people of the planet, for the people of the planet) in a duly popularly elected "planetary government,” with that supernational government related to th existing nations of the world in a manner similar to the present relationshij between the various constituent States of the Union and the United States o America.

A three-legged stool cannot stand on one of its legs, nor on two of them Similarly, a world organization cannot be made to stand steadfast unless it i composed of and stands three-square on the supports of universal peace, economi justice, and individual freedom.

To think out ways and means of providing all three of these things at on and the same time is the task of peace lovers and justice lovers and freedor lovers here and everywhere, while there is yet time to get busy at that task before the atom bombs begins to fall.

I submit that your committee could, and therefore should, recommend to th United States Congress that that body recomemnd to the United Nations that i consider publicly the suggestions I am making (with its deliberations made matter of world-wide radio dissemination by right of eminent domain-neces sity knowing no other law than its own-over any and all radio transmission a the moment, so all mankind with receiving facilities can hear those deliberations.

If the present delegates to the United Nations-reflecting world public opinionwere favorable to the idea of that body being transformed from that of on appointed by the rulers of the nations, as at present, to a popularly elected bod: representative of all the people of the world direct, instructions could be given out over the radio for all individuals who cared to do so to vote (and all should, on pain of forfeiture by nonuse, exercise their franchise rights on all questions of world importance) at local polls, to be arranged for by the United Nations. I earnestly urge your committee to recommend this procedure to Congress.

Carrying a step further the application of the idea expressed by Winston Churchill yesterday, in Amsterdam, where he told a gathering of 30,000 prsons, in connection with the uniting of the nations of Europe : "It must be a Europe where men of every country will think as much of being a European as of being a citizen of his own country,” your committee can recommend that Congress recommend that the United Nations recommend to individuals the world over that they should extend their consciousness and loyalty to an over-all world grouping of individuals in which they can each be as appreciative of world-citizenship rights and privileges and duties as they now are of national rights and privileges and duties.

This whole matter of a united world citizenship should be far above comparatively petty national or partisan politics and I assure you that it is not to inject them into these proceedings that I submit herewith, what I would call exhibit A a copy of a brief article to appear in the current issue of Action for Human Welfare, the official organ of the Holdridge-for-President Committee, of which I happen to be the local chairman. This article is entitled “Can We Salvage the United Nations," and reads as follows:

"On every hand we hear the question raised as to whether the United Nations must go the way of the old League of Nations. What has happened to the high hopes and aspirations of the people, and the expressions of the world's diplomats who met at San Francisco? Was it all talk? Or was it just dust to be thrown into the eyes of the people? Could it have been nothing but a part of the planned fraud of warmongers and the exploiters of humanity to continue their malevolent control of the resources and the people of the earth? Was Dumbarton Oaks only a hoax? Was the gathering at 'Frisco only a planned fiasco? From the results it would seem so.

"But, even taking it for granted that the failure was planned from the beginning by those who wanted it to fail, i. e., the zealots of the free enterprise economic royalists and the latter-day money changers, what are the people going to do about it now? What can we, the people, do? What do we have time to do? Shall we try to salvage it? Can it be converted from a debating society of appointed delegates into a legislative body of elected representatives? And, if so, how?

*It has been said that all the people can be fooled some of the time, and some of the people all the time. The question is: Have the people been fooled enough about this supposed agency for world peace? This paper believes they have. And it proposes to proclaim, even thought it is at first nothing but 'a voice crying in the wilderness,' that the people should insist on the abdication of money lo.ds of the capitalist system insofar, at least, as their control of their puppet United Nations Organization is concerned. The people must act at once. Exactly, how, this paper is not quite certain, but attempt must be made without delay to upset the plans for further wars of the beneficiaries of wars and depressions, those who have fooled us long enough with their misnamed 'United' Nations, when it is all too obvious that the nations, as such, are not united, and that, as such, they cannot unite, and that the behind-the-scenes plotters of the United Nations neither believed nor intended that mankind should thereby become united.

"How did this condition come about? Let us go back a bit.

"During the summer of 1940 four items appeared at intervals in the Washington Post; from which we quote:

"First (on May 26): Dr. Hjalmer Schact, former president of the Reichsbank, has been entrusted by Fuhrer Hitler with working out a plan for the economic reconstruction of Europe.” That article went on to say that Dr. Schacht planned "the introduction of a completely new monetary system.'

"Second (on July 12): An announcement that Sir Frederick Phillips, British Under Secretary of the Treasury, was on his way to the United States to discuss with Secretary of the Treasury Morganthau 'the whole problem of gold' and “reconstruction of Europe on a gold basis again if England succeeds in defeating Germany.'

“Third (on July 16): An article headed 'Fight to Save Gold Begins' stated : "The United States and Britain began yesterday to map plans for a financial counterattack on Nazi Germany in an unprecedented battle to maintain gold as

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »