Mr. Wood. Of the $101 million, Senator George, the present plan is that only $10 million will be for economic purposes, and the $89 million or $90 million Mr. NASH. The $91 million for military. Senator GEORGE. Yes, I understand that. SPANISH GNP Mr. WOOD. There was one other question asked. What was the gross national product of Spain? A rough figure on that is about $6 billion. Senator HUMPHREY. Per year? Mr. WOOD. Per year. Senator MANSFIELD. $6 billion? AMERICAN SKILLS, SPANISH LABOR The CHAIRMAN. Who will construct these airfields? Mr. NASH. The construction of them will be done by the United States with such firms as we select and, as I said a little while ago, Senator, we will have to bring them-we will have to use talent from the United States. The CHAIRMAN. I have this in mind, and this can be off the record. [Discussion off the record.] The CHAIRMAN. Any other questions on this subject? Senator MANSFIELD. Mr. Chairman, on the basis of what you have just said, I would assume you would pay skilled American technicians the going wage in this country, but most of your labor would be Spanish labor paid at the prevailing rate in that country? Mr. NASH. That is correct, sir. The chairman's point is the lessons we have learned, we have learned the very point you have stated, and learned it the sad way, but we have learned it, and I think the statement Senator Mansfield makes of the employment of indigenous labor will be in line with what the labor in Spain commands. [Discussion off the record.] The CHAIRMAN. All right, gentlemen; we thank you. I suggest to the gentlemen of the committee, if you will, that you carry on with the bill, and Senators Fulbright, Hickenlooper and I can go into the other room and go on with our subcommittee, and you fellows can go through the balance of the bill. Senator Knowland is on the subcommittee, too. [Discussion off the record.] TESTIMONY ON THE COMMODITY PROPOSAL Mr. Woop. Mr. Chairman, may I make sure just what you wish, which people you want here tomorrow at 2 o'clock on the agricultural question? You want the Director of the Bureau of the Budget. the Secretary of Agriculture, who, I understand, is out of town, but Mr. Morse can be here. Do you want the head of the CCC, or do you not! Senator KNOWLAND. I think he should be here. Mr. Woon. And then Senator KNOWLAND. Somebody from the Treasury Department. Senator HUMPHREY. Mr. Chairman, may I ask in reference to this testimony tomorrow, is it possible to have just somebody over here from MSA who has contacted these respective agencies rather than the parade of witnesses? Senator KNOWLAND. I would like the witnesses over tomorrow. The CHAIRMAN. That is in the afternoon. The committee will meet tomorrow morning here at 10 o'clock. We have got one nomination, and we have got to go on with the bill at 10 o'clock. [Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the committee adjourned to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, June 10, 1953.] MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 9, 1953 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee on overseas information, met at 4:30 p.m. in the committee room. Present: Chairman Hickenlooper, Senators Wiley, Green, and Fulbright. For record of proceedings, see official transcript. (580) 1 MUTUAL SECURITY ACT-Continued 1 WEDNESDAY, JUNE 10, 1953 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:00 a.m., in the Foreign Relations Committee Room, U.S. Capitol, Senator Alexander Wiley (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Wiley (chairman), Smith of New Jersey, Hickenlooper, Tobey, George, Green, Fulbright, Sparkman, Humphrey, and Mansfield. Also present: C. Tyler Wood, Associate Deputy Director, Mutual Security Agency; Robert B. Eichholz, Mutual Security Agency; Dr. Wilcox; Dr. Kalijarvi; Mr. Holt; Mr. Marcy; and Mr. O'Day of the committee staff. [The Committee first considered and postponed approval of the nomination of Amos J. Peaslee to be Ambassador to Australia. It then resumed consideration of the mutual security bill. The form of the bill was further discussed, it having been learned that the House Foreign Affairs Committee was marking up its version of the bill in the functional format. It was decided to continue as before with the preferred geographic breakdown. Private investment guarantees and a technical amendment relating to the use of local currencies were then taken up, after which discussion turned to the matter of a termination date for the program.] The CHAIRMAN. All right; page 16. FOUR-YEAR EXTENSION OF MSA OPPOSED Senator MANSFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment that we strike "1958." The CHAIRMAN. What was that? Senator SMITH. Strike what? Senator MANSFIELD. Strike "1958" on line 4, which has been substituted for June 30, 1954, which I think should remain, and my amendment would strike out what amounts to a 4-year extension of MSA. Senator HUMPHREY. Are you not going to be involved, though, in this offshore procurement program if you do that because you are contracting for a lot of planes and stuff over in Britain which cannot be produced by 1954, and this is, as I understand it, a limitation on the expenditure of funds when this act runs out and, therefore, the man who pays the bill is apt to go to jail? 1 See notes, p. 407. Senator MANSFIELD. But subsections (1) and (2), Senator, I think take care of that. Mr. WOOD. That is correct. This does not so much, Senator Humphrey, relate to that problem. Senator HUMPHREY. I see. JUSTIFICATION OF THE PROPOSED EXTENSION Mr. Wood. If you passed section (1) and section (2) you would be able actually to pay for deliveries of the Hawker Hunters which took place after June 30, 1955. This first of the extensions is an extension of 4 years pursuant to the principles that have been stated by President Eisenhower and others that we want to get on to the basis of a longer sustainable program chiefly in connection with our military assistance. Senator SPARKMAN. It is to take care of the stretchout, is it not? Mr. WOOD. It is to take care of this somewhat reduced longer range program and to indicate that we are not going to shut off all our association with and support, for example, of NATO and the Formosan military effort and others at the end of fiscal year 1954. It was thought most desirable from the standpoint of an orderly program, and from the standpoint of the psychological effect which it would have on our position of leadership in the world now to take action to put into effect these intentions, if the Congress agrees. That is why the request is made that the terminal date be now extended from 1954, which it is in the present act, to 1958. Then, in addition, this permission to pay for items for which obligations have been made prior to the termination date for a period longer than 12 months therafter, is also requested. Senator MANSFIELD. Question?" The CHAIRMAN. The question-the motion now by Senator Mansfield is to strike "1958" and leave "1954" in. Senator SPARKMAN. Mr. Chairman, let me ask this question: As 8 matter of fact, has not the program that was originally intended been stretched out for at least 2 additional years, and if we left the "1954" in there, is that not a little unrealistic in view of the program that is planned now? Mr. Wood. I do not know that you could put it quite that way, Senator. Certainly, we have not achieved, for various reasons, the military buildup which it had originally been planned to achieve, notably in Western Eunrope, by the end of 1954. In that sense it has been stretched out. The real point here is that it does seem unrealistic and unwise to continue to assume that in connection with building up the strength of the free world the United States will not find it in its own interest to continue to assist with military and, in certain cases, other aid to our allies all over the world after June 30, 1954, and if that date is now left in the legislation and is not extended, we will not, unless subsequent action were taken by the Congress, be able to enter into any obligations or obligate any funds after June 30, 1954, and in the real world, as it exists, with our NATO alliance running for many years, and the situation we find in the world, it seems entirely unrealistic |