網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

and security and justice are not endangered and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

ARTICLE II

In order more effectively to achieve the objective of this Treaty, the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.

ARTICLE III

The Parties, through their Foreign Ministers or their deputies, will consult together from time to time regarding the implementation of this Treaty and whenever in the opinion of either of them the territorial integrity, political independence or security of either of the Parties is threatened by external armed attack in the Pacific.

ARTICLE IV

Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on either of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common dangers in accordance with its constitutional processes.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

ARTICLE V

For the purpose of Article IV, an armed attack on either of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of either of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or on its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.

ARTICLE VI

This Treaty does not affect and shall not be interpreted as affecting in any way the rights and obligations of the Parties under the Charter of the United Nations or the responsibility of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security.

ARTICLE VII

This Treaty shall be ratified by the United States of America and the Republic of the Philippines in accordance with their respective constitutional processes and will come into force when instruments of ratification thereof have been exchanged by them at Manila.1

1 Instruments of ratification were exchanged Aug. 27, 1952.

ARTICLE VIII

This Treaty shall remain in force indefinitely. Either Party may terminate it one year after notice has been given to the other Party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned Plenipotentiaries have signed this Treaty.

DONE in duplicate at Washington this thirtieth day of August 1951.

14. STATEMENT TRANSMITTED TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE BY THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PRESIDENT, JANUARY 7, 1952 (Excerpt) 2

The mutual defense treaty between the United States and the Republic of the Philippines translates into dignified and mutual form a relationship of interdependence which already exists. As such, it marks a new milestone in the relation of the free West and the free East.

The historical relationship between the United States and the Philippines, and their common struggle in the Second World War, are themselves sufficient to assure that, as President Truman said in his public declaration of April 18, 1951

the whole world knows that the United States recognizes that an armed attack on the Philippines would be looked upon by the United States as dangerous to its own peace and safety and that it would act accordingly.3

Furthermore, there already existed an agreement, March 14, 1947, with the Philippines, granting the United States certain military rights and facilities in the Philippines, so that an armed attack upon the Philippines would almost automatically involve an attack upon the armed forces of the United States.

However, the geographical position of the Philippines in the Western Pacific and its fully sovereign status made it desirable that the Philippines should be a full and equal partner in any postwar arrangement for peace and security in this area.

This possibility was discussed in a general way by Mr. Dulles and other members of his mission with the President of the Republic of the Philippines and other leading personalities of the Republic during mid-February 1951; and, after plans were further developed in the light of subsequent discussions in Australia and New Zealand, the United States formally proposed to the Republic of the Philippines, in August 1951, the conclusion of a mutual security treaty along the

1 John Foster Dulles.

2 S. Execs. A, B, C, and D, 82d Cong., 2d sess., pp. 24-25.

3 Department of State Bulletin, Apr. 30, 1951, p. 699.

A Decade of American Foreign Policy, pp. 869-881.

See Ambassador Dulles' address of Mar. 1, 1951; Department of State

Bulletin, Mar. 12, 1951, pp. 403–407.

See ibid., Aug. 27, 1951, p. 335, and Sept. 3, 1951, p. 394.

NIA

same lines as were being considered in relation to Australia and New Zealand. This proposal was promptly accepted by the Republic of the Philippines. The negotiations were brief because of the understanding and community of interest which already existed and the treaty itself was formally signed the same month in the presence of the President of the United States and the President of the Republic of the Philippines.1

The putting of our relations with the Philippines on a treaty basis of sovereign equality was strongly urged by members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who were particularly active and helpful in this connection. Since the substance of the mutual defense treaty follows closely that of the Australia-New Zealand-United States treaty, its terms require no comment here beyond that contained in annex 32 in relation to the comparable articles of the other treaty.

It was understood that this treaty was part and parcel of the Japanese peace settlement and the related treaty program for creating peace and security in the Western Pacific area and presupposed the ratification of the Japanese Peace Treaty by the United States and the Republic of the Philippines.3

The members of the United States delegation to conclude the Philippine Mutual Defense Treaty were the Secretary of State, Mr. John Foster Dulles, Senators Tom Connally, Alexander Wiley, John J. Sparkman, H. Alexander Smith, Walter F. George, and Bourke B. Hickenlooper of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Representatives Abraham A. Ribicoff and Walter H. Judd of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

15. REPORT OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, FEBRUARY 14, 1952 (Excerpt)

4

The deep interest of the United States in the welfare and security of the Philippines dates back to the Spanish-American War. Following World War II, relations between the two Governments were formally established in a series of important agreements. These included the Treaty of General Relations, signed on July 4, 1946, which recognized the independence of the Philippines," and the two agreements of 1947 relating to military assistance and the use of certain bases in the islands."

1 For the texts of statements made at the signing ceremony, see ibid., Sept. 10, 1951, pp. 422–425.

2 Infra, doc. 17.

3 The United States deposited its instrument of ratification of the Japanese peace treaty Apr. 28, 1952; the Philippine Republic, July 23, 1956.

S. Exec. Rept. No. 2, 82d Cong., 2d sess., pp. 25-26.

5 A Decade of American Foreign Policy, pp. 861-864.

• Ibid., pp. 881-885 and 869-881.

On April 18, 1951, President Truman, in a public statement underlined the importance which the United States attaches to the security of the Philippines:

The whole world knows

stated the President

that the United States recognizes that an armed attack on the Philippines would be looked upon by the United States as dangerous to its own peace and safety and that it would act accordingly.1

This is the principle which is incorporated in the security treaty between the two Governments and which is now before the Senate. In a sense it can be said that the treaty merely formalizes a relationship that has been in existence for some time.

The committee agrees that, in view of the importance of the Republic of the Philippines in the Far East and its new status as a sovereign state, it would seem highly desirable to include that country on a basis of complete equality in any collective arrangements for peace and security in that area. That is why, during the negotiation of the Japanese Peace Treaty, members of both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee agreed with the executive branch that a mutual security pact be concluded with the Philippine Government. On the Senate side, consultations relating to this matter took place between Ambassador Dulles and the Far Eastern Subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee.

It will be noted that, in general, the provisions of the treaty with the Philippines follow very closely the terms of the security pact with Australia and New Zealand. Since that agreement has been outlined in section 25 above, it will not be necessary to repeat those comments here. Suffice it to say the two parties agree to settle their disputes by peaceful means (art. I), to develop their capacity to resist armed attack (art. II), to consult if their territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened in the Pacific (art. III), and to take appropriate action in the event an armed attack is launched against them (art. IV). The treaty does not formally establish a council as does the pact with Australia and New Zealand, although adequate provision is made for consultation between the Foreign Ministers or their deputies.

Article VIII provides that the treaty shall remain in force indefinitely. Either party, however, may terminate it following a 1 year's notice of its intention to do so.

1 Department of State Bulletin, Apr. 30, 1951, p. 699.

2 Infra, doc. 18.

STANFORD

1

Security Treaty Between the United States, Australia, and New Zealand (ANZUS)

16. TEXT OF TREATY, SEPTEMBER 1, 19511

The Parties to this Treaty,

Reaffirming their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all Governments, and desiring to strengthen the fabric of peace in the Pacific Area,

Noting that the United States already has arrangements pursuant to which its armed forces are stationed in the Philippines,2 and has armed forces and administrative responsibilities in the Ryukyus, and upon the coming into force of the Japanese Peace Treaty may also station armed forces in and about Japan to assist in the preservation of peace and security in the Japan Area,3

Recognizing that Australia and New Zealand as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations have military obligations outside as well as within the Pacific Area,

Desiring to declare publicly and formally their sense of unity, so that no potential aggressor could be under the illusion that any of them stand alone in the Pacific Area, and

Desiring further to coordinate their efforts for collective defense for the preservation of peace and security pending the development of a more comprehensive system of regional security in the Pacific Area,

Therefore declare and agree as follows:

ARTICLE I

The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international disputes in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

ARTICLE II

In order more effectively to achieve the objective of this Treaty the Parties separately and jointly by means of continuous and effec tive self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.

1 TIAS 2493; 3 UST 3420-3425. Ratification advised by the Senate, Mar. 20, 1952; ratified by the President, Apr. 15, 1952; entered into force, Apr. 29, 1952. A Decade of American Foreign Policy, pp. 881-885 and 869-881.

8 See article 6 of the Japanese peace treaty (supra, p. 428) and the security treaty with Japan (infra, doc. 19).

« 上一頁繼續 »