網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

me he was in a sense very satisfied with progress having been made last year in retaining the Plaine de Jarres from the Pathet Lao. I think you can see how quickly your situation deteriorates and yet your department, of which you are a part, is still insisting they will not make public the hearings the Symington subcommittee held on Laos just recently. I really don't know how you can be a part of a democratic system and take such a position. It is beyond my comprehension and that is why I would like a very precise letter as to why the Secretary of State believes that this committee is not to be informed about nuclear weapons abroad. I think they ought to justify it, not just a flat statement, but give a reason.

Will one of you undertake to do that?

Mr. BROWN. We will see that your message gets to the Secretary. Senator FULBRIGHT. You will see that it does?

Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir.

Senator AIKEN. May I ask a question because I have to attend a meeting of the Atomic Energy Committee which has met every day at the same time this committee has been meeting, and the Agriculture Committee as well. What is happening to nuclear power? Are they developing nuclear powerplants in South Vietnam-are they doing any work in the nuclear field?

Mr. Sato told us what Japan is doing, probably quite a lot in developing power, but is Korea developing nuclear power too?

DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR POWER IN KOREA

Mr. PORTER. Korea has under consideration certain powerplant developments. I take it my instructions on this general subject of nuclear development don't extend to the economic field. They are negotiating with an American firm for the construction of a power facility; yes, sir.

Senator FULBRIGHT. It was just before you came in. I guess you didn't hear it. I asked the Ambassador about nuclear weapons. He said he has been instructed by the Secretary of State not to discuss nuclear weapons, the disposition, anything about nuclear weapons, as I understand it, with this committee. I was just stating that I don't think I or the committee is willing to accept this proposition that we have no right to know about the disposition of nuclear weapons abroad. Senator AIKEN. But we have been informed about the situation in Japan.

Senator FULBRIGHT. He just now stated he has been instructed by the Secretary of State not to discuss nuclear weapons in Korea. [Deleted] but he is told and he has been instructed not to discuss it with him. I am not saying, I don't know these things in a number of cases, in Laos or otherwise.

What we really are basing our argument about is the attitude of the executive department that they control completely what this committee or the Senate should know and should not know or what should be public about the public's business.

Well, fundamentally it is a constitutional question of whether the State Department and the Pentagon are absolute masters or whether we play a part in this Government, that is about what it comes down to that, and we believe we do, and we have a right to know, and this clearly has implications with regard to foreign policy.

Could you respond to this kind of a question. Do you believe that there are any foreign policy implications from the presence of nuclear weapons in a foreign country? If you don't want to talk about Korea, we will say any foreign country. Does it have foreign policy implications?

Mr. PORTER. Sir, my instructions cover nuclear weapons without limitation as to place and they cover the subject.

Senator FULBRIGHT. You would not then want to express a view as to whether or not there are any political implications arising from the placing of nuclear weapons in any foreign country.

Mr. PORTER. I would not want to, sir, under my present instructions. Senator FULBRIGHT. And this is aside from asking you whether they are actually there or not, you would not respond to a hypothetical if they were there this would have important political implications. Mr. PORTER. I would not be, I am not authorized to do it.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Well, in fact you are instructed not to aren't you?

Mr. PORTER. I am instructed not to go into the subject.

Senator AIKEN. Mr. Chairman, I don't think the public has been informed whether nuclear weapons are stored in this country. And if this were known there might be political upheavals in some parts of the United States, some of our environmentalist friends.

Senator FULBRIGHT. George, there has been no complete inventory but there have been a number of articles-take the incident, I think about 2 years ago when the presence of nuclear weapons around certain big cities became known, and they just raised hell about it, if you remember, causing a major change in the policy of the Government. I am hopeful if we can be enlightened in the Senate and the Congress that we can make a major change in the misguided policies of the present Government as well as the past one. That is what this is all about.

We can't do anything about it effectively when we can't make it public in a convincing manner.

ATTITUDE OF GENERAL PARK TOWARD PLACING NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN KOREA

Could you discuss the attitude of General Park towards the placing of nuclear weapons in Korea. Could you say anything about that. Mr. PORTER. I could say that he has announced publicly that although no one really seeks these items that in the common interest they would consider storage if ever the United States wished to do something on that subject.

Senator FULBRIGHT. He made a public statement.

Mr. PORTER. Yes, sir.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Recently.

Mr. PORTER. Yes, sir.

Senator FULBRIGHT. How long ago?

Mr. PORTER. Quite recently, I would say several months ago.
Senator FULBRIGHT. Could you supply that statement for the record?
Mr. PORTER. We can, sir.

(The information referred to follows.)

PUBLIC COMMENT BY PRESIDENT PARK REGARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Question: Will you propose that the United States build new naval and air bases in South Korea to replace those that may have to be given up in Okinawa? Answer: Our position is clear on that point. Regardless of what happens to Okinawa, we are willing to offer Cheju Island as a site for new U.S. bases-not necessarily as a replacement; possibly as a supplement to area security. Question: Does South Korea have a stake in Okinawa?

Answer: The reversion of Okinawa to Japan is, in principle, a bilateral matter between America and Japan. However, it is vital to the security of Asia and should be viewed from that standpoint.

Question: Would South Korea become the U.S. "forward nuclear base" if such weapons are taken from Okinawa?

Answer: If Cheju Island is used as a U.S. military base, the installation of nuclear weapons there may be inevitable.

Question: Would the Korean people welcome this?

Answer: Welcome? No. Permit? Yes. Many nations are unwilling to harbor nuclear arms because of the horrifying implications of thermonuclear warfare. However, our people are intimately familiar with the Communist threat. We have already experienced one brutal war started by them. Therefore, we value the power of deterrence, and would tolerate the introduction of nuclear weapons into our territory.

Senator FULBRIGHT. So you are not prohibited from telling us that General Park made a statement with regard to nuclear weapons. Mr. PORTER. I can't believe I am prohibited from saying something that he said publicly.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Well, I could believe it.

You are not the first one.

RIGHT OF WITNESS TO REFUSE INFORMATION QUESTIONED

I have been in the Senate 25 years, and about 3 months ago the Ambassador from Thailand said he was instructed not to discuss the agreement with the Thais as to what we paid the Thai troops [deleted.] It is the first time in my life I have ever had an ambassador tell this committee "We have been instructed not to answer questions." This is the equivalent of the fifth amendment being applied to an ambassador before this committee, and we didn't accept it. He finally backed off of that. I think you are going to finally back off of nuclear weapons if you ask me because I don't think the Senate or this committee will stand for this, and I believe the Senate will back them up in the long run. You will just cause us an awful lot of trouble, that is all, and a lot of controversy which I think is unnecessary.

I don't know where the origin of this idea is that an Ambassador and an Assistant Secretary of State can come in and say "we are not going to talk about that with you." It is the first time.

George, you have been here a long time, have you ever had it before this year?

Senator AIKEN. Not that I know of.

Senator FULBRIGHT. I don't recall. You have been here in the Senate longer than I have and this is a new development.

Senator AIKEN. To take the fifth amendment.

Senator FULBRIGHT. This is a new development.

Mr. PORTER. I hope, sir, if I may make a personal statement—
Senator FULBRIGHT. I wish you would.

Mr. PORTER (continuing). That the comparison with the fifth amendment type of thing not be carried too far.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Well, it is the only activity in the public domain before the Judiciary Committee that when they come in, and stand upon their constitutional right, I don't know what right you think you are standing on or the Secretary does in refusing to tell the Congress about such matters.

Surely didn't he tell you, give you any reason that justifies your taking this attitude?

Mr. PORTER. No, sir; the instruction was quite simple.

Senator FULBRIGHT. This seems odd to me that you are not prepared to give any justification for such a decision. He didn't say "Mr. Ambassador, tell them that under the Constitution or under some law, or under executive privilege." There is a recognized executive privilege. I don't think at all by any means it would apply to this and, therefore, I don't think he has any jusification.

U.N. POSITION RELATIVE TO USE OF ATOMIC WEAPONS

Senator AIKEN. I would like to ask, has the United Nations taken any position relative to the use of atomic weapons at any time? This being a United Nations operation over there, I was just wondering what their attitude is.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Mr. Brown ought to be able to answer that.

Mr. BROWN. I am sorry.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Any of your experts, bright young faces looking full of information, will anybody back there volunteer any information?

Well they are, there are a lot of young men there who ought to know about this.

Senator AIKEN. I say this is not a U.S. operation, it is the United Nations we were talking about.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Technically it is. Does the United Nations know whether there are nuclear weapons in Korea? Are they informed?

Mr. PORTER. I am not in position to comment on that. Senator. Senator FULBRIGHT. If this doesn't sound like the fifth amendment I never heard anything that does. You just refused. The only thing you give is your name when it comes to nuclear weapons. In effect that is what you are saying.

Senator AIKEN. We have a hearing on the United Nations wanting $40 million more to expand their operations in the U.N. center a week from Monday, I believe. I think we will have to ask them a few questions.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Say that over.

Senator AIKEN. I believe we have a hearing set for a week from Monday on the request of the United Nations for a $40 million annex to their building in New York, which has now been overflowing, and I think we will have quite a few questions to ask the United Nations and among those questions we might inquire about Korea and a few other places. It would be very interesting to get the answers.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Yes.

Senator AIKEN. But of course they could all take the fifth amendment.

Senator FULBRIGHT. They could.

Senator AIKEN. I can't think of anything else. Probably we will give some of them to taking the fifth, some the fifth amendment.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Will you provide us with this information about the United Nations that the Senator has asked about?

Mr. BROWN. Yes.

(The information referred to follows.)

HAS THE UN TAKEN A POSITION ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS?

The UN General Assembly has adopted a number of resolutions in the disarmament and peaceful uses areas, such as endorsing the NPT, urging a seabed arms control treaty, calling for a comprehensive test ban, and endorsing the limited test ban treaty. UN organs have played a role in developing language for treaties pertaining to nuclear weapons. For example, the ENDC helped develop the nuclear test ban treaty and its successor organization, the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament (CCD), is now working on a draft treaty regarding non-emplacement of weapons of mass destruction on the seabed as well as draft treaties forbidding chemical and biological warfare. The Outer Space Committee developed language for the Outer Space Treaty which prohibited orbiting of weapons of mass destruction in outer space.

The GA has also passed resolutions relating to nuclear free zones, outer space and the draft seabeds arms control treaty now under consideration in the CCD. On December 20, 1968, the General Assembly adopted by a vote of 98 (U.S., UK) to 0, with 16 abstentions (France, USSR), a resolution calling for the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones and for full compliance by the nuclearweapon powers "as soon as possible" with paragraph 4 of the resolution adopted by the General Assembly in December 1967 that invited powers possessing nuclear weapons to sign and ratify Additional Protocol II of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America. The U.S. has not yet ratified this protocol. Thus far, Latin America is the only area having an agreed nuclear free zone.

The question of the use of nuclear weapons in Korea has not arisen in the United Nations.

Mr. PAUL. I would say one thing about your question, Senator Aiken, each of the three nuclear powers, the United States, Soviet Union, and Great Britain, made identical statements in the Security Council as to what they do in the event of a threat or actual attack on a nonnuclear country.

Mr. BROWN. In connection with the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Mr. PAUL. That is in June 1968 but that is all I know which is relevant.

Senator FULBRIGHT. But you don't know anything with regard to the Korean resolution.

Mr. PAUL. No, sir.

Senator AIKEN. We ought to find out whether South Korea is a non-nuclear country or not.

GENERAL PARKS' KNOWLEDGE OF NUCLEAR MATTERS

Senator FULBRIGHT. Coming back to the statement of General Park, you don't happen to have it available with you now but you will get it.

Mr. PORTER. I am not sure we have it with our material; we don't have it here.

Senator FULBRIGHT. Have you ever discussed with General Park the nuclear problem.

Mr. PORTER. I never have had such discussion.

Senator FULBRIGHT. You never mentioned nuclear matters with General Park-then you don't know whether General Park knows whether there are weapons there or not, do you?

« 上一頁繼續 »