the United States, the presence of Cuban military advisers in Africa, and U.S. claims for property seized by the Cuban Government. Mr. Trattner noted that the U.S. Foreign Claims Settlement Commission determined in July of 1972 that the United States has claims valued at 1.8 billion dollars against Cuba, while Cuba has an undetermined amount of claims against the United States.

In response to a further question, Mr. Trattner indicated that less than a dozen Americans would be stationed within two or three months in Havana pursuant to the agreement.

Mr. Trattner also announced that the Cuban Government had informed the United States on June 3, 1977, that the Cuban Government planned to release ten American prisoners immediately and that the cases of all of the other twenty remaining American prisoners were being reviewed. Mr. Trattner said that seven of the thirty American prisoners were being held for crimes against the state while the rest were being held for drug-related and hijacking offenses. The ten prisoners being released had been held in connection with drug-related offenses.

Section 411 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1978, Public Law 95-105, 91 Stat. 861, approved on August 17, 1977, expresses the sense of the Congress concerning any negotiations toward the normalization of relations with Cuba. The section, which appears below, calls for negotiations on a reciprocal basis, mentions certain U.S. interests to be protected, and specifies certain Cuban policies to be taken into account:

(a) It is the sense of the Congress that any negotiations toward the normalization of relations with Cuba be conducted in a deliberate manner and on a reciprocal basis, and that the vital concerns of the United States with respect to the basic rights and interests of United States citizens whose persons or property are the subject of such negotiations be protected.

(b) Furthermore, it is the sense of Congress that the Cuban policies and actions regarding the use of its military and paramilitary personnel beyond its borders and its disrespect for the human rights of individuals are among the elements which must be taken into account in any such negotiations.

Hungary

On December 13, 1977, Philip M. Kaiser, U.S. Ambassador to the Hungarian People's Republic, sent a letter to Frigyes Puia, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Hungary, confirming President Carter's determination to return the Hungarian coronation regalia to Hungary. Portions of the text of the letter follow:

As you know, President Carter has determined that it is appropriate and fitting that the Crown of St. Stephen and other Hungarian coronation regalia, which have been in the safekeeping of

257-179 O-79-4

the United States since the close of World War II, be returned to the people of Hungary. We are now prepared to return the Crown and other coronation regalia in a ceremony in Budapest.

As a result of my discussions with you and with other senior officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs concerning the return of the Crown, it is my understanding, and that of my Government, that the following arrangements have been decided upon by our two Governments:

-The Crown and other coronation regalia will be returned to the Hungarian nation and people in a solemn public ceremony at a venue in Budapest which will underscore the historical, cultural, religious, and national tradition of these objects as well as the "people-to-people" nature of their return.

-President Carter, as Chief of State, will appoint a senior United States Government official, or other prominent American, as his personal representative to lead the American delegation which will return the Crown and other regalia. The American delegation will include Members of the United States Congress and other representatives of the American people. It is our intention that the American delegation will include Americans of Hungarian descent chosen to exemplify the contributions of Hungary to the development of the American nation. I will inform you as soon as possible of the precise composition of the American delegation.

-The Crown and other regalia, as property of the Hungarian nation and people, will be received by the head or designated representative of the Hungarian state. We understand that representatives of the Hungarian National Assembly, Presidential Council and Government, leaders of the Hungarian Churches-including the Hungarian Cardinal-Primate and leaders of Hungarian Protestant denominations and of the National Representation of Hungarian Jews—as well as representatives of Hungarian public organizations and outstanding personalities of scientific and cultural life will be among those invited to participate in the ceremony.

-Remarks at the ceremony will be confined to statements which will emphasize traditional United States-Hungarian ties, friendship between our two peoples, and our mutual desire to continue the development of better bilateral relations.

-In keeping with the fact that the ceremony of return of the Crown will be an event of international interest, representatives of American, Hungarian, and international media, including press, radio, and television, will be permitted to film, record and report the ceremony. Such media coverage will also be possible for the arrival in Budapest of the American delegation and for other similar events in connection with the return of the Crown.

-The Hungarian and United States Governments will, upon transfer of the Crown and other regalia, exchange notes or letters acknowledging the safe receipt of these objects and waiving any claims by each Government against the other Government arising from the United States Government safekeeping of them.

-A joint communione officially announcing that the Crown and other coronation regalia will be returned is to be made simultane

ously in the near future by appropriate United States and Hungarian authorities.

-The Crown and other coronation regalia will be placed on permanent public display in an appropriate historical location in Budapest for the population of the country, Hungarians living abroad and foreigners alike to see.

*

On December 13, 1977, Foreign Minister Puja responded to Ambassador Kaiser with a letter indicating that the points outlined in Ambassador Kaiser's letter "clearly reflect my understanding, and that of my Government, of the arrangements which have been decided upon by our two Governments concerning the return of the Crown" and other Hungarian coronation regalia to the Hungarian people. On December 15, 1977, the Department of State announced that the return of the Crown would take place in Budapest on January 6 and 7, 1978.

Dept. of State Press Release No. 570, Dec. 15, 1977.

On December 16, 1977, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a memorandum and order in Curtis v. Carter (77–2069), denying the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent President Carter and other members of the executive branch from returning the Hungarian coronation regalia to Hungary. The Court, in a memorandum and order issued by U.S. District Judge June L. Green, found unconvincing the plaintiff's theories of U.S. ownership of the regalia and ruled that the return of the regalia presented a nonjusticiable political question involving the conduct of U.S. foreign relations. The action had been brought by Senator Carl T. Curtis and other members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

On December 19, 1977, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Circuit Judges J. Skelly Wright and Roger Robb, summarily affirmed (77-2105) the district court decision. On December 21, 1977, Warren E. Burger, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, denied the plaintiff's application for injunctive relief in the matter.

Portions of the district court memorandum and order follow:

*

Plaintiffs have failed to make a substantial showing of likelihood of success on the merits, even when this showing is governed by "the balance of equities . . . ." Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Comm'n. [v. Holiday Tours, Inc., 559 F. 2d 841 (D.C. Cir. 1977)]. Plaintiffs' theories of United States ownership of the Hungarian coronation regalia, and in particular, their latest contention that it is captured property of a hostile state, have thus far not been convincing. Hence, the applicability of article IV, section 3. clause 2

and article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution is highly questionable. In the absence of any property interest, the return of the regalia presents a nonjusticiable political question involving the conduct of our foreign relations. The Constitution places these matters exclusively in the hands of the executive branch. Additionally, plaintiffs' standing to bring this action is doubtful under the analysis set forth in Harrington v. Bush, 553 F. 2d 190 (D.C. Cir. 1977).

With regard to the balance of equities as to the other relevant standards set forth in Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Ass'n. [v. FPC, 259 F. 2d 921 (D.C. Cir. 1958)], the "harm to other parties in the proceedings" and the public interest outweigh the injury to plaintiffs if the injunction is not issued. A delay in the President's plans for return of this property to Hungary under terms which have been agreed upon by both governments may have an impact on the effective conduct of our foreign affairs, and specifically on our steadily improving relations with Hungary. Such a result would not be in the public interest. Accordingly, plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction is denied.

U.S. App. D.C. No. 77-2069, pp. 2–3.

On January 6, 1978, Secretary Vance headed a U.S. delegation at a ceremony in Budapest in which the Crown of St. Stephen and other Hungarian coronation regalia were returned to the Hungarian people.

14 Weekly Comp. of Pres. Doc. 45 (Jan. 9, 1978). For further information concerning the return of the Hungarian coronation regalia, see post, Ch. 5, § 1, pp. 377-384.

Korea

During his speech before the Asia Society in New York on June 29, 1977, Secretary Vance expressed support for the entry of North and South Korea into the United Nations and outlined U.S. policy toward improved relations with North Korea. A portion of his remarks follows:

The United States and the Republic of Korea share a strong desire to establish a durable framework for maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula.

-We support the entry of North and South Korea into the United Nations without prejudice to ultimate reunification.

-We are prepared to move toward improved relations with North Korea provided North Korea's allies take steps to improve relations with South Korea.

-We have proposed negotiations to replace the existing armistice with more permanent arrangements.

-We have offered to meet for this purpose with South and North Korea and the People's Republic of China as the parties most immediately concerned and to explore with them the possibilities for

a larger conference with Korea's other neighbors, including the Soviet Union. We will enter any negotiations over the future of the peninsula only with the participation of the Republic of Korea.

Dept. of State Press Release No. 313 (June 29, 1977).

The Agreement Concerning a Military Armistice in Korea with Annex was signed at Panmunjom on July 27, 1953, by the Commander-in-Chief of the United Nations Command, the Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army, and the Commander of the Chinese People's Volunteers (TIAS 2782; 4 UST 234; entered into force on July 27, 1953).

People's Republic of China

In his first major policy declaration on Asia before the Asia Society in New York on June 29, 1977, Secretary Vance stated that the United States would seek to move toward full normalization of relations with the People's Republic of China on the basis of the principles of the Shanghai communique of 1972. An excerpt of that portion of the Secretary's speech dealing with the People's Republic of China follows:

After 25 years of confrontation, we are carrying on a constructive dialogue with the People's Republic of China.

Vast differences in culture, social systems, ideology, and foreign policy still separate our two countries. But the Chinese and American people no longer face each other with the hostility, misunderstanding, and virtually complete separation that existed for two decades.

We consider friendly relations with China to be a central part of our foreign policy. China's role in maintaining world peace is vital. A constructive relationship with China is important, not only regionally, but also for global equilibrium. Such a relationship will threaten no one. It will serve only peace.

The involvement of a fourth of mankind in the search for the solution of global issues is important.

In structuring our relationship with the Chinese, we will not enter into any agreements with others that are directed against the People's Republic of China. We recognize and respect China's strong commitments to independence, unity, and self-reliance.

Our policy toward China will continue to be guided by the principles of the Shanghai communique, and on that basis we shall seek to move toward full normalization of relations. We acknowledge the view expressed in the Shanghai communique that there is but one China. We also place importance on the peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves.

In seven weeks, I shall be in Peking to talk with the leaders of China. A broad range of world issues demands our attention. And we want to explore ways to normalize further our bilateral relationship with the People's Republic of China. Mutual and reciprocal efforts in this regard are essential.