each contemplated the development of a more comprehensive system of regional security in the Pacific area.

Like the earlier treaties, the Manila Pact is in full conformity with the purposes and principles set forth in the Charter of the United Nations and is based on article 51, which recognizes the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense. It is directed against no government, against no nation and against no peoples.

The treaty consists of a preamble and 11 articles. The preamble sets forth the spirit and purposes of the treaty. It recognizes the sovereign equality of all the parties and reiterates their faith in the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments. Reaffirming the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, it declares the intention of the parties to strive by every peaceful means to promote self-government and to secure the independence of those countries whose people desire it and are able to undertake its responsibilities. Declaring publicly and formally their sense of unity, the parties give warning to any potential aggressor that they stand together in the area. The preamble expresses also the fundamental purpose of the treaty, i. e., the further coordination of efforts for collective defense for the preservation of peace and security.

Article I contains undertakings similar to those in comparable articles of other security treaties. By its terms the parties reaffirm their solemn obligations under the Charter of the United Nations to settle by peaceful means any international disputes in which they may be involved, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. All of the parties to the treaty are members of the United Nations.

Article II incorporates in the treaty the principle of the Vanden berg resolution (S. Res. 239, 80th Cong.), which requires that regional and collective security arrangements joined in by the United States be based on continuous self-help and mutual aid. The parties pledge themselves by such means not only to maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack but also to prevent and counter subversive activities directed from without against their territorial integrity and political stability. The treaty thus recognizes the danger of subversion and indirect aggression, which as we are keenly aware have been principal tools of international

communism.

Article III recognizes the importance of free institutions and sound economies in achieving the objectives of peace and security. It is based on the realization that the opportunities of communism will diminish if through economic cooperation the free nations are able to develop their internal stability. The parties agree to cooperate in promoting economic progress and social well-being. This article does not commit the United States to any grant program. However, as I stated in my address of September 15, Congress had the vision to

1 Resolution of June 11, 1948; A Decade of American Foreign Policy, p. 197.

see this year that there might be special needs in Southeast Asia. By the Mutual Security Act,' Congress has already provided certain funds which may be used to assist the free governments of Southeast Asia.

The article builds no economic walls against countries or territories not parties to the treaty. While a special relationship ought to prevail as between those countries which together assume serious commitments, the treaty countries are fully aware of the importance from an economic standpoint of such nations as Japan, Indonesia, Burma, Ceylon, India, Formosa, and other areas in the Far East and South Asia area. Article III does not preclude our continued economic cooperation with these and other countries whose economic welfare is deemed important to the stability of the treaty area as well as to our own well-being.

Article IV contains some of the most important provisions of the treaty. It sets forth the measures by which the parties agree to take action against armed aggression and against the danger of subversion and indirect aggression.

Under paragraph 1 of that article each of the parties recognizes that

aggression by means of armed attack in the treaty area against any of the Parties or against any State or territory which the Parties by unanimous agreement may hereafter designate, would endanger its own peace and safety, and agrees that it will in that event act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes.

That language is based upon the Monroe Doctrine principle and follows the pattern of other United States security treaties in the Pacific. Each party recognizes in article IV, paragraph 1, that the armed attack referred to therein would be dangerous to its own peace and safety.

In the case of the United States, only a Communist armed attack can bring that treaty provision into operation. The understanding of the United States in this respect is embodied in the treaty itself. It reads as follows:

The United States of America in executing the present Treaty does so with the understanding that its recognition of the effect of aggression and armed attack and its agreement with reference thereto in Article IV, paragraph 1, apply only to communist aggression but affirms that in the event of other aggression or armed attack it will consult under the provisions of Article IV, paragraph 2.

This understanding reflects the special position of the United States as the only one of the signatories which does not have any territory in the treaty area. For the other signatories the treaty deals with any and all acts of aggression which might disturb the peace of the area. For the United States, however, it is expressly stipulated that the only armed attack which the United States would regard as necessarily dangerous to our peace and security would be a Communist armed attack. Recognition that Communist armed aggression in Southeast Asia would in fact endanger the peace and security of the United States, and call for counteraction by the United States, is 1 Act of Aug. 26, 1954; 68 Stat. 832-864. See also infra, pp. 3105-3140.

STANFORD LAM

based on the realization that the spread of international communism poses a threat to the United States as it does to the entire free world.

The language of paragraph 1 also provides for designation, by unanimous agreement, of other states or territories an armed attack against which will result in bringing certain of the treaty provisions into operation. I recommend that you inform the Senate that this provision is to be interpreted as requiring the advice and consent of the United States Senate to any agreement making such a designation. The agreement of each of the parties to act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes" leaves to the judgment of each country the type of action to be taken in the event an armed attack occurs. There is, of course, a wide range of defensive measures which might be appropriate depending upon the circumstances. Any action which the United States might take would, of course, be in accordance with its constitutional processes.

Provision is made in the final sentence of the paragraph for reporting the measures taken against armed aggression to the Security Council of the United Nations in accordance with the obligation of the parties under article 51 of the United Nations Charter.

The danger from subversion and indirect aggression is dealt with in paragraph 2 of article IV, which meets this difficult problem more explicitly than any other security treaty we have made. It provides for immediate consultation by the parties whenever any party believes that the integrity of the treaty area is threatened by other than armed attack. The threat may be to the territorial inviolability or integrity, or to the sovereignty or political independence of any party in the treaty area or any other state or territory to which paragraph 1 of the article may from time to time apply. The paragraph contains no obligation beyond consultation, but the purpose of consultation is to agree on measures to be taken for the common defense. In its understanding with reference to article IV, paragraph 1, the United States affirms that in the event of any aggression or armed attack other than Communist aggression it will observe the consultation provisions of article IV, paragraph 2.

Paragraph 3 affirms the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples proclaimed by the treaty signatories in the Pacific Charter. It states the understanding of the parties that, except at the invitation or consent of the government concerned, no action shall be taken on the territory of any state designated under paragraph 1 or on any territory so designated.

To facilitate implementation of the treaty, article V establishes a Council, on which each party is to be represented. The Council will provide for consultation with regard to military and other planning as the changing situation in the treaty area may require.

No material changes in the military planning of the United States will be required by our participation in the Council. At present, United States plans call for maintaining at all times powerful naval and air forces in the Western Pacific capable of striking at any aggres sor by means and at places of our choosing. As I explained at the

Manila Conference, the responsibilities of the United States are so vast and farflung that we believe we would serve best not by earmarking forces for particular areas of the Far East but by developing the deterrent of mobile striking power plus strategically placed reserves. The Conference accepted that viewpoint, recognizing that the deterrent power we thus create can protect many as effectively as it protects one. However, other treaty members may deem it desirable to make their contribution toward strengthening the defense of the area by specific force commitments for that purpose.

Article VI makes clear that the obligations of the parties under the treaty do not affect in any way their obligations under the United Nations Charter. It recognizes the primary responsibility of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and security. Each party declares that it has no existing international obligations in conflict with the treaty and undertakes not to enter into any international engagements in conflict with it.

Article VII takes into account that not all countries whose interests now or in the future may be bound up with the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty are in a position to become parties at this time. It accordingly provides that the parties, by unanimous agreement, may invite any other state in a position to further the objectives of the treaty and to contribute to the security of the area, to accede to the treaty at a later date. I recommend that this article be interpreted as requiring the advice and consent of the Senate for the United States to join in the "unanimous agreement" required for the invitation of new parties.

Article VIII defines the "treaty area" as the general area of Southeast Asia, including the entire territories of the Asian parties, and the general area of the Southwest Pacific not including the Pacific area north of 21 degrees 30 minutes north latitude. Provision is made for amendment of the treaty area by unanimous agreement. On the part of the United States, I recommend that Senate advice and consent be required for such agreement.

Article IX assigns to the Republic of the Philippines the customary duties as depositary of the treaty. Paragraph 2 provides that the treaty shall be ratified and its provisions carried out by the parties in accordance with their respective constitutional processes. The association of the United States in collective arrangements "by constitutional process" was recommended by the Vandenberg resolution and has been the basis for all of our security treaties.

Paragraph 3 of article IX provides that deposit of ratifications by a majority of the signatories shall bring the treaty into force between the states which have ratified it. With respect to each other state it shall come into force on the date of deposit of its ratification.

According to article X the treaty has indefinite duration, but any party may cease to be a party 1 year after its notice of denunciation has been given. It is hoped that the cooperation for peace and security which is the objective of this treaty will be permanent.

1 See supra, doc. 30.

However, since the conditions in the treaty area are subject to fluctuation, a flexible provision in respect to duration seems desirable.

Article XI is a formal article regarding the authentic language texts of the treaty.

The protocol extends the benefits of articles III and IV to the States of Cambodia and Laos and the free territory under the jurisdic tion of the State of Vietnam. The Indochina situation was considered by some of the treaty signatories as creating obstacles to these three countries becoming actual parties to the treaty at the present time. By designating them as states or territories for the purposes of article IV, the protocol assures that armed attack or indirect aggression against Cambodia, Laos, or the territory under Vietnamese jurisdiction will bring into operation the obligations of the parties under that article. It thus throws over those new nations a certain mantle of protection. The protocol also extends to those countries eligibility in respect of the economic measures, including technical assistance, contemplated by article III. It thus recognizes that economic progress and social well-being in these areas are essential to the economic welfare of the whole area and a vital force in combating the oppor tunities of communism.

In addition to the treaty and protocol, there was also drawn up and signed at the Manila Conference a declaration known as the Pacific Charter. The charter was the idea of President Magsaysay of the Republic of the Philippines, who emphasized the importance of making clear that the treaty signatories were seeking the welfare of the Asian peoples and were not promoting "colonialism." As I said in my opening address to the Conference, one of communism's most effective weapons is to pretend that the Western Powers are seeking to impose colonialism on the Asian people. I said then that we must make abundantly clear our intention to invigorate independence.

The Pacific Charter proclaims certain basic principles in relation to the right of peoples to self-determination, self-government, and independence. It dedicates all the signatories to uphold these principles for all countries whose people desire it and are able to undertake its responsibilities. In the Pacific Charter the West and the East have joined in a pledge of fellowship that supports and invigorates the basic principles which underlie the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty and protocol.

In view of the importance of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty and protocol as a deterrent to Communist and other aggression and as a bulwark in the maintenance of peace and security in the Pacific area, it is hoped that the treaty including the understanding of the United States contained therein, together with the protocol, will be given early and favorable consideration by the Senate. Respectfully submitted.

JOHN FOSTER DULLES.