toward the United Nations Congo operation. I believe it comes to some 62 countries. I hereby submit that list for the record.

(The list referred to is as follows:)

NATIONS WHO HAVE PAID NO PART OF THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARD THE UNITED NATIONS OPERATION IN THE CONGO THROUGH FEBRUARY 14, 1962 (Total, 62)

Senator SPARKMAN. Let me ask this question.

Are the lists of countries who have defaulted in payment for UNEF and ONUC identical?

Mr. GARDNER. I think there is some difference between the defaulters on the one account and on the other. Some countries have political objections to the Middle East operation in particular, and some to the Congo operation in particular. I think the record will show that there is some difference in the identity of the countries which have failed to pay for the two operations.

Senator SPARKMAN. For instance, did Belgium support UNEF? Mr. GARDNER. I am informed they did, but they did not pay for the Congo.

Senator SPARKMAN. That is in line with your statement.

Senator AIKEN. Would you say that the number was comparable or have more countries paid something toward UNEF than they have toward the Congo?

Mr. GARDNER. We will supply that for the record, with your permission.

(The information referred to is as follows:)

NATIONS THAT HAVE MADE PARTIAL PAYMENT ON UNEF BUT HAVE PAID NOTHING ON UNOC AS OF FEBRUARY 14, 1961 (TOTAL, 24)

Senator AIKEN. I happen to think of Yugoslavia, which supports UNEF but not the Congo. There are a few other examples: (The list referred to is as follows:)

NATIONS THAT HAVE FULLY PAID UNEF BUT HAVE PAID NOTHING ON UNOC AS OF FEBRUARY 14, 1962 (TOTAL, 10)

Austria

Brazil

Ecuador

France

Ghana
Indonesia
Italy
Portugal

South Africa
Yugoslavia

Mr. GARDNER. Another question was asked about the Canadian position. Perhaps I just could say this: as of today's date, Canada has agreed to subscribe in the amount of approximately $6.2 million toward the bond issue, and is owed a good deal less than that by the United Nations-in fact, about $4 million-as of today's date.

Senator AIKEN. How much has Canada been paid this month or last month? How much has Canada been paid on account since the first of January this year?

Mr. GARDNER. Approximately $1.2 million.
Senator AIKEN. When was that paid?

Mr. GARDNER. Early in January, Senator.

Senator AIKEN. I was told that after this discrepancy appeared between the two sets of figures, the books had been gone over again in Ottawa and a little over a million dollars was found which has not been billed.

Mr. GARDNER. About $1.5 million is not billed.

Senator AIKEN. That makes the original figure about $54 million due Canada as of January 1. Is that correct, or approximately correct?

QUESTION OF AMOUNTS REPAID BY U.N.

Mr. GARDNER. This leads me, Senator, to another question which I believe Senator Aiken raised, namely, if the United Nations is in difficult financial straits, why is it making these payments to Canada and the United States? Well, I think the answer to that is that the United Nations, like any businessman, any honest businessman, does try to pay its creditors as the money becomes available, and modest payments have been made this year, both to Canada and the United States. The United Nations paid, for example, the United States some $2.4 million early this year, out of the $28 million that it owed us. In other words, it is paying off these obligations in a small way as cash becomes available to it.

Senator AIKEN. Did the U.N. pay all of the 26 creditors something on account?

Mr. GARDNER. Not all of them, Senator.

Senator AIKEN. Do you know how much has been paid on account to those 26? You have $2.4 million to the United States, $1.2 million to Canada-that is $3.6 million paid to these countries. How much would you say has been paid to the other 24 creditors?

Mr. GARDNER. I am afraid I do not have that information at hand, but I can supply that for the record.

Senator AIKEN. I think that would be interesting information to have-whether the United States and Canada were paid more than the other countries, and why.

Senator SPARKMAN. Is it your reasoning that such payments might be sweetening to the United States and Canada in order to make them subscribe more easily? It seems to me it is just the other way around. You mean it shows they do not need the money?

Senator AIKEN. No, I am not even reasoning on it. I am just seeking information. When I get the information, I will start reasoning. Senator SPARKMAN. It seems to me this shows good management. Even though the U.N. cannot pay in full what they owe, if they pay $10 million of the $15.5 million available on their accounts, and hold back $5.5 million for day-to-day expenses, it seems to me they are doing pretty good business.

(The information requested is as follows:)

Payments made by the United Nations to member states for amounts owed by the United Nations on UNEF and ONUC-Period, Jan. 1 to Feb. 21, 1962

1 The amounts due Equador and Greece were included under the head "II. Other Payees" in the United Nations "Analysis of the United Nations Financial Position as at Dec. 31. 1961.

2 A credit rather than a payment against the UNEF assessment as of Dec. 31, 1961.

This payment made in January 1962.

4 These payments made Feb. 21, 1962.

Source: Office of the Comptroller, U.N.

QUESTION OF AUTHORITY FOR ONUC

Mr. GARDNER. Mr. Chairman, a question was raised this morning about the authority for the United Nations military operations in the Congo. I should just like to emphasize that a number of Security Council resolutions provide this authority. It is not necessary to look to the General Assembly for it.

Senator SPARKMAN. I referred awhile ago to the fact that even subsequent to the General Assembly resolution of September 20, 1960, there were two subsequent Security Council resolutions.

Mr. GARDNER. Yes; one of February 21, 1961, and one of November 24, 1961.

Senator AIKEN. Did those resolutions relate to the military operations?

Mr. GARDNER. Yes, Senator.

Senator AIKEN. In what way?

Mr. GARDNER. Well

Senator AIKEN. As I read them over, I could not quite see the connection.

Mr. GARDNER. The resolution of February 21, 1961, enlarged the mandate of the United Nations forces in the Congo to include the pre

vention of civil war by the use of force if necessary in the last resort. The resolution also urged that measures be taken for the withdrawal of all foreign military personnel, political advisers not under the United Nations command, and mercenaries. The Security Council resolution of November 24, 1961, expanded the mandate further to include an authorization to use the requisite measure of force if necessary for the expulsion of foreign military personnel.

A summary of these resolutions is contained in appendix 21, on pages 98 and 99, of this joint committee print.

Senator AIKEN. Did Russia vote for these resolutions in the Security Council?

Senator SPARK MAN. I was going to ask how they were agreed to. Mr. GARDNER. I know that the Soviet Union-well, they could not have voted against them if they were approved. They were not vetoed. (The information requested follows:)

Record of votes in the Security Council on the several resolutions on the Congo

Senator AIKEN. Did France abstain on some of them?

Mr. GARDNER. I would have to check that. I think France may have abstained.

(The following information was subsequently furnished.)

France abstained on the vote in the Security Council on the resolution on the Congo dated February 21, 1961.

Senator AIKEN. Has a majority of the Security Council members paid their assessments?

Mr. GARDNER. I cannot give that information out of my head. The United States and the United Kingdom, of course, have paid up. I think several other members of the Security Council has also paid. Senator AIKEN. Several of the elected members?

Mr. GARDNER. Yes.

Senator AIKEN. The United States and the United Kingdom are the only permanent members of the Security Council that have paid their assessments for the Congo. The other three you will find in that list of 62.

Senator SPARKMAN. Yes. Of course, one of those is Nationalist China.

Senator AIKEN. They say they cannot pay.

Senator SPARKMAN. They have not even paid the operating budget. Senator AIKEN. France and Russia say they will not pay, up to now. Then when we go to the International Court, we are basing our cause on these subsequent resolutions, as well as the original recommendatory resolution.

Mr. GARDNER. Well, the International Court is not being asked to pass upon the legality of the action in the Congo.

Senator AIKEN. It is asked to give an opinion on this.

Mr. GARDNER. I think, Senator, it is being asked a narrower question: namely, whether the assessments on account of the Congo and Middle East operations are expenses of the Organization within the meaning of article 17 of the United Nations Charter.

Senator AIKEN. That means "legal," in my language.

Senator SPARKMAN. Isn't this the same question raised this morning?

Senator AIKEN. Yes. I suppose that is why the case is in Court. Senator SPARKMAN. That is why it is in Court.

Mr. GARDNER. Well, the specific question being asked the Courtand this is contained in appendix 6, on page 37 of this print-is whether the expenditures in support of these various operations are expenses of the Organization within the meaning of article 17, paragraph 2.

Now, it would be possible for the Court to say that the operations were legal, but that the assessments did not have the same binding legal character as assessments for the regular budget. I am simply trying to show, Senator, that these are somewhat different questions. The narrow question, of course, is quite simply whether the assessments to pay for the Congo and UNEF have the same binding legal character as the assessment for the regular budget.

Senator AIKEN. Then the legality of the operation is not in question, but the legality of the assessment.

Mr. GARDNER. The binding legal character of the assessment. Senator SPARKMAN. I think we are right back where we started. Senator AIKEN. Let us wait for the Court decision.

Senator SPARKMAN. We are not going to decide it one way or the other. I think your answer is correct.

PROPOSAL FOR REPAYMENT OF BONDS

Mr. GARDNER. Another question, Mr. Chairman, that was raised is how the United States can be assured of getting repaid on our bonds. More specifically, the question was asked about a possible offset; that is, whether it would be acceptable for the administration to have the repayment of the U.S. bonds credited against our obligation to pay for current assessments to the United Nations. I think that such a proposal is embodied in an amendment proposed by Senator Church, if I am not mistaken.

Senator SPARK MAN. Yes; it is pending before this committee.

Mr. GARDNER. The administration would have no objection to that proposal. It certainly would be quite appropriate.

Senator AIKEN. This payment on operational expenses that has just been made by India-did India just automatically deduct that $600,000 from the amount which is due her on the ONUC operation?