CUBA AND THE COLD WAR

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 33
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 2, 2005
• Sequence Number: 20
• Publication Date: July 29, 1963
• Content Type: OPEN

1963 Approved For ikggg q i : f4 1 6SB Q ?Lt000200250020-3 12819
Medal; and the National Defense Service
Medal.
Maj or Rushworth now resides at
Edwards Air Force Base with his wife,
the former Joyce Butler of Norridgewock,
Maine, and 6-year-old daughter, Cheri.
Mr. Speaker, I can appreciate the
great measure of pride that Major Rush-
worth's attainments have brought to his
wife, his daughter, and his mother.
I want to take this opportunity of join-
ing with a legion of others in saluting
Major Rushworth and extending to this
distinguished son of Maine my very warm
congratulations on his latest achieve-
ment at the threshold of space.
COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND
CURRENCY
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, on behalf
of the gentleman from Texas IMr. PAT-
MAN], I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Banking and Currency
may be permitted to sit today while the
House is in session during general debate.
The SPEAKER. Without objection, it
is so ordered.
There was no objection.
CUBA AND THE COLD WAR
The SPEAKER. Under previous order
of the House, the gentleman from Penn-
sylvania [Mr. WEAVER] is recognized for
2 hours.
(Mr. WEAVER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. WEAVER. Mr. Speaker, it has
been 10 years since the Moncado episode
in Cuba. Castro has taken over the
island and has failed to carry out a single
one of the pledges he made at that par-
ticular time. Today we are on the brink
of signing a test-ban treaty.
Lest we forget what has happened in
the Western Hemisphere, Members of
both sides of the aisle are joined together
today to present a discussion of the cold
war and Cuba.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Vir-
ginia [Mr. MARSH] and I are acting as
coordinators for other Members on both
sides of the aisle to present to the Mem-
bers of the House a series of talks on a
concerted plan to help fight the cold war
and to win back Cuba for democracy.
Our purpose is, first, to alert the Ameri-
can public to this problem and, second,
to let Latin America know that we in
Congress truly care about the fate of our
sister nation, Cuba.
Mr. Speaker, we shall review many ac-
tions taken in the past in relation to Cuba
and make recommendations for a coordi-
nated future program for our allies in the
Western Hemisphere. We shall present
a varied program which is bipartisan in
nature and is not meant to be one of lam-
basting and whipping over the history
and the personalities of the past involved
in the present posture of Cuba.
Mr. Speaker, we shall recognize speak-
ers who have previously requested time.
It is then our intention to recognize all by the Soviets was not just in the when the President set up embargoes on
of those who wish to be heard during the military arena using missiles but, rather, Cuba and immediately and for the. first
coming hours. it is twofold. The second phase of that time we had 100 percent cooperation, a
At the conclusion of the speeches the strategy is continuing now in the same
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. MARSH] relentless methods of conquest so char-
and I shall review for you some of the acteristic of the international Communist
significant features of this program. conspiracy.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentle- It is this second form of strategy-the
man from Virginia [Mr. MARSH]. subversion of Latin America from a Cu-
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I am very ban base-that we need to be concerned
grateful to the gentleman from Penn- about, which poses now a real threat to
sylvania [Mr. WEAVER] for this oppor- the security of all the Americas.
tunity to present a few comments on a Yet the Cuban situation is not a parti-
serious subject that affects not only the san issue; it is not an issue of any party,
security of the Americas but_ indeed the but, rather, it is an issue that should be
security of the world. discussed bipartisanally to form a con-
Mr. Speaker, only a hasty glance at certed action for those who seek to pre-
the headlines of the current newspapers serve and extend the boundaries of free-
is necessary to find testimony of the dom.
relentless drive of the Sino-Soviet em- The issue is really freedom versus slav-
pire for world conquest. This steady ery, for now we see the colonial power
march for world domination has con- of the Soviet Union intervening and
tinued for nearly a half-century. Hav- denying to the Cuban people the right of
ing crushed Tibet the Red dragon of self-determination, the Soviet Union
China sits astride countless miles of the seeking to enforce their rule through the
territory of India. Along the banks of police state by stationing Russian troops
the Mekong River in South Vietnam can on the island who might employ in Ha-
be heard the ugly chatter of machine- vana the tactics learned in Budapest.
guns where there is being waged a war This is our challenge, it is a challenge
that is both brutal and vicious and not to all Americans. It is not a party chal-
so cold. Yet it is along the banks of lenge, because it is one that each of us
the Mekong River that could well be must meet, indeed we must meet it not
determined the future of all southeast only for the freedom of this Nation, but
the Soviets ceased in their. relentless I thank the gentleman from Pennsyl-
determination to ring down on freedom's vania again for permitting me to make
lonely stage the iron curtain of Red these remarks.
slavery in Berlin. The Red standard Mr. WEAVER. I thank the distin-
that flies from over a dozen capitals of guished gentleman from Virginia for the
Eurasia has now been firmly planted in fine background for our discussion today
the Caribbean where it is intended to on the cold war and Cuba.
be a beachhead for a revolutionary as- Mr. Speaker, I yield now to the gen-
sault upon all of Latin America, a rev- tleman from Florida [Mr. ROGERS].
olutionary assault that will be waged Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr.
not only militarily but, rather, will be Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I am
waged psychologically, economically, and pleased to join with the other Members
politically, where in the arsenal of their of Congress on both sides of the aisle in
weaponry will be espionage, subversion, a very bipartisan approach to this prob-
sabotage, guerrilla warfare, terrorism, lem, one that does concern the American
and violence. people. As we consider this problem of
Mr. Speaker, on the Cuban island Cuba and what has been done and what
there are being trained revolutionaries should be done, the American people will
who study the guerrilla doctrines of Mao be impressed with the fact that it is not
Tse-tung, Ho Chi Minh, and Che Gue- just Members of Congress from Florida
varra. Here are being trained the who are concerned about this problem
guerrillas to infiltrate Latin America and but there are Members from Pennsyl-
wage there a form of warfare that was vania, Virginia, Washington, on 'the
waged by the Castro movement in the other side of this country, California,
late fifties so successfully. Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, Minne-
Mr. Speaker, the Soviets placed their sota, and Kansas who are concerned.
missiles on the Cuban island and this As a matter of fact, all States in this
Nation, scarcely 10 months ago, was con- union are concerned.
fronted with a situation of deadly peril. It Is incumbent upon the Congress to
Militarily, there was sought to be generate the concern and to start the
changed the balance of power in nuclear leadership in many lines necessary to
weaponery. Last fall we discovered get rid of Castro and communism in this
that there were on the Cuban island hemisphere. Of course, there are two
missiles undoubtedly intended for Amer- approaches: unilateral action by the
ican targets. United States alone as well as multi-
Mr. Speaker, the world was apprehen- lateral action through the organization
sive during our quarantine and the re- of American States.
sulting confrontation; America was May I say, as I have tried to say many
proud of the bold and decisive and coura- times before on the floor of this House,
geous action that was taken so success- multilateral action comes only after
fully at that time, with the full support unilateral leadership by the United
of the American people, and in coopera- States. The greatest example of multi-
tion with our allies including the Organi- lateral action following strong leader-
zation of American States. ship or unilateral action by our country
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 12820 Approved FcC@2HDNBi1/0ll.H 3R000200250020-3 M July 29
joinder by the Organization of American
States.
One of the things I have been con-
cerned with particularly is the economic
action that can be taken against Castro.
This is a field that I think can bring
immediate hurt to Castro and commu-
nism, can make Russia's task so much
more expensive and so much more dif-
ficult that it helps to destroy the reason
for Russia even being concerned with
Cuba. Furthermore I think by sealing
off Cuba in this hemisphere, as can be
done, that this would destroy the very
reason for Russia being there. If we
can prevent the travel to and from Cuba,
if we can prevent the transfer of funds
throughout the hemisphere to Cuba, if
we can cut off telecommunications be-
tween Cuba and the rest of the hemi-
sphere, then the very reason for Russia
having their people there, which is to
subvert the rest of the hemisphere,
would be destroyed, and I think that Is
the very first step to be taken by this
Nation and the nations of this hemi-
sphere.
I am concerned about Allied shipping
into Cuba. In January of this year the
shipping from our well-known allies was
down to about 12 ships, but since that
time we have seen an increase in this
shipping until last May it was up to about
44, and in June it was up to about 38 or
39 from the latest reports, and it is
possible that even those reports can In-
crease because many of the intelligence
sources that come in and are checked
out require some time. At any rate we
are seeing a steady increase in Allied
shipping again back Into Cuba which
simply takes the burden off of Russia
in using its own ships to come In and
supply the goods that are very necessary
for this Cuban island to exist. So the
lifeblood and the method of feeding
communism into Cuba right now Is
being carried on by such of our sup-
posedly good friends as Britain and
many other nations, people who have
professed great friendship with us and
yet are letting their own ships be used to
carry on this policy of undermining the
very purposes of freedom In this hemi-
sphere and undermining the policies of
our own Government.
Mr. DEVINE. Will the gentleman
from Pennsylvania yield in order that
I may ask a question of the gentleman
from Florida?
Mr. WEAVER, Would the gentleman
from Florida care to yield?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I yield for
a question.*
Mr. WEAVER. I will yield to the
gentleman for a question.
Mr. DEVINE. Mr. Speaker, first I
would like to compliment the gentleman
from Florida. I have seen him In the
well and time and time again in this ses-
sion of Congress on this very subject. I
know he is vitally interested due to the
proximity of his district to the Island of
Cuba, that here as he said is a bipartisan
problem that should be faced directly.
The gentleman from Florida has been a
consistent fighter in this regard. I
might say just last weekend a group, a
task force from this side of the aisle, di-
rected a letter to the administration on
the very subject on which the gentleman policy here by taking some positive ac-
is talking, and I wish again to compli- tion. The American people want it.
ment him on his continued fight for what I certainly want to compliment all of
Is a solid American principle. my colleagues from all over this coun-
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I thank the try who are sufficiently concerned about
gentleman for his remarks, and appre- this problem to speak up and to demand
ciate, too, his continued Interest in try- some action and some leadership to get
Ing to do something about this problem rid of Castro and communism in this
of Cuba. I was delighted to see the let- hemisphere.
ter that was sent to try to encourage I thank the gentleman.
stronger action in cutting off this ship- Mr. WEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I thank
ping. I would like to ask all Members the gentleman from Florida who has
who are concerned to join me in spon- been a champion from the very begin-
sorship of this bill that I introduced a ning of action on Cuba. I now yield
number of days back, H.R. 7687, which to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. FoRE-
has as its purpose, In effect, the closing MAN].
of American ports to the ships of any na- Mr. FOREMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank
tion which allows any of its ships to go the gentleman for yielding. Mr.
into Cuba. This is the only way we are Speaker, I take this opportunity to ex-
going to be able to cut It off. Halfway press my appreciation to the gentle-
measures are not going to work. We man from Pennsylvania [Mr. WEAVER]
have seen our Government make repre- and the gentleman from Virginia [Mr.
sentatfons to some of these so-called MARSH] for spearheading this discussion
allies and other friends of ours, asking today to offer some constructive pro-
them. "Won't you please cut off your posals and ideas to do something about
shipping to stop Russia from building up the deplorable situation in Cuba.
Cuba? Won't you please stop your ship- I am particularly pleased to see my
ping to Cuba?" colleagues from both sides of the aisle
They say, "Oh, well, we would like to entering into this discussion, opening it
help you, but somehow we just can't go up for review in the way they have. I
this far." think the American people are more
The administration took a halfway concerned, more deeply concerned, with
step in saying that any ship that goes this situation that faces us in Cuba and
Into Cuba cannot come Into an American in fact around the world, than they are
port after that for 120 days. Well, it is with any other problem with which this
very easy to get around that. They sim- country is faced today. The American
ply let one ship do that while all the people want some positive action here.
other ships come into American ports I think the people around the world are
and carry on all the trade they want to. watching the United States to see what
I think we ought to let them make a we are going to do.
quick decision as to whether they want This is not Just a Communist buildup
to trade with the United States of Amer- in Cuba. It Is not just a threat to the
ica or whether they want to trade with United States that we are talking about,
Russia and Cuba. ' The best way to do but this is a threat to the entire free
it is for the Congress itself to take action; world. I think that the prestige of
to say that this Is the congressional In- America started into a sharp decline at
tent, this Is going to be the law, this the time we allowed the Russians to
is what we want done. We want our build up their Communist foothold in
American ports closed to any ship from this hemisphere. I think this is well
any nation if It permits any one of Its demonstrated by the fact that Mr. de
ships to go into Cuba carrying these Gaulle now wants to build up his nuclear
Russian goods, force In France. If America does not
The Congress can do this. And I soli- have the guts and the willingness to
cit the support, as I am sure we have it stand up for freedom when communism
here in the Congress, of other Members is established 90 miles off our shores, are
to unite in joint sponsorship of this ap- we going to have guts enough to stand
proach. Let us pass a law to cut off this up and help the countries of Europe
shipping. Let them quickly make their when the Russians push communism
decision, and I am sure it will be quickly into their countries? I do not blame Mr.
done, because any country which has de Gaulle. If I were in France or in
large trade with the United States will any other free country I think I would
make that decision very quickly; because take a second look at it, too, when we
all of the trade to Cuba represents only say we are for freedom and yet allow
about 1 percent of their trade. And yet the Communists to establish the foot-
look what It is doing in taking the burden hold that they now have In Cuba.
away from Russia. I think the American people are cor-
Mr. Speaker, these are some of the sect in saying that they are tired of this
things I think we can do In the Congress business of being concerned with how
quickly to show our Intent, just as we popular we are Instead of how right we
did when we passed that bill some time are, and they, as do I, believe that the
back, when we said that we wanted to Kennedy brothers ought to get as tough
prevent Cuban goods from coming Into with Castro and communism as they did
this country. When this House unani- with the American steel industry.
mously passed that bill, immediately I, along with many of my colleagues,
after, even though it did not have a have, for over a year, recommended pos-
chance to pass the Senate because It was itive action in Cuba by establishing an
in the closing days of the last Congress, economic blockade of Cuba, Initiation of
the Executive Immediately recognized hard-hitting negotiations with our Al-
the intent of the congressional bill and lies to stop trade and aid to Cuba, and
cut off that trade. So we can direct the recognition of a free-Cuban Gov-
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963 Approved For Rg19M1P??JWA1j (1A&Qffi5BcjR?W00200250020-3
Y 12821
ernment in exile, including the granting
of technological and military assistance
if necessary to help the Cuban people re-
gain freedom. '
We could squeeze out the Castro-Com-
munist government now, and without
war, if we would initiate action immedi-
ately, but if we allow Castro to continue
to build up his military strength and the
Russians to solidify their position in this
hemisphere, we could be forced into war
to rid ourselves of this Communist threat
on our southern shores.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this oppor-
tunity of taking part in this discussion
and I commend my colleagues for bring-
ing it to the attention of the American
public in the very constructive manner
they have today.
Mr. WEAVER. I thank the gentle-
man from Texas for his remarks.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentle-
man from Colorado [Mr. BROTZMAN].
(Mr. BROTZMAN asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. BROTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I join
this discussion with a sense of great re-
sponsibility-also urgency. Responsibil-
ity, because I believe to be born free is
an accident, to live free is a responsibil-
ity, to die free is an obligation; urgency,
because our Nation is involved in a cold
war that can be just as deadly to the
noble purposes of our Government as
that type of conflict proclaimed by flam-
ing muzzles and screaming bombs.
We as a nation spend billions of dol-
lars on defense, following our policy of
deterrence through strength, a policy
which I support. But each of us must
be aware that this deterrence keeps an
arena of combat open. This is an arena
where the fight is for the hearts and
minds of men, and this battle is being
waged around the clock. This is a fight
where the weapons of our opponents are
subversion, propaganda, lies, and brutal-
ity-anything to obtain their objectives.
As a Congressman I receive much mail
from my constituents decrying our lack
of foreign policy, or, in the alternative,
frustration over our schizophrenic pol-
icy. We are supporting a coalition with
Communists in Laos, yet we fight against
Communists in Vietnam. The adminis-
tration vows determinedly to rid the
Western Hemisphere of Communist
domination, yet we erect insurmountable
obstacles against anti-Castro forces who
want to rid themselves of this savage,
godless ideology.
In making these remarks and joining
with my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle, my intention is to make construc-
tive and affirmative suggestions concern-
ing ways in which I believe our policy
can be made realistic, can be made effec-
tive and demonstrative of the leadership
we must assume. In this context I ob-
ject strongly to a statement recently
made by Mr. McGeorge Bundy, the Presi-
dential adviser on foreign policy.
Speaking on a panel conducted by the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and refer-
ring to Cuba, Mr. Bundy said:
Honest critics should say whether they
prefer these acts of war to the Kennedy
policy.
Implicit in this statement is the as-
sumption that there is no action that
can be taken, no alternative, no improve-
ments made between our "wait and see"
policy and war. I submit that a posi-
tive, affirmative program in this area
would lessen the chances of war, not in-
crease them. I further submit that this
"all or nothing" approach of Mr. Bundy's
does a disservice to the cause of building
a sound, effective Cuban policy, free from
unbridled partisanship.
Last April, Freedom House, in col-
laboration with the Citizens Committee
for a Free Cuba, brought together a
group of nonpartisan experts who studied
the Cuban problem. One conclusion of
that group bears directly on this subject:
The net effect of examining such factors
is to suggest that a simple policy of risk
avoidance can lead only to the certainty of
a worsening position for the United States.
Indeed, it is more likely that an improvement
of our position will occur only from a process
of intelligent risk taking. This was demon-
strated in the October confrontation. The
administration took manageable risks rather
than accept the certainty that the nuclear
balance would swing in Russia's direction
and that Khrushchev's capability for black-
mail and attack would be Increased by the
presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba. Unfor-
tunately, while it was clearly willing to take
risks In order to obtain a Soviet pledge of
an inspected withdrawal of the missiles,
there was not willingness to take the risk
of a follow through. Is there any practical
value in running risks to gain a pledge, and
running no risks to enforce It?
A brief look at any map or globe
clearly shows the importance of the is-
land of Cuba in relation to the challenge
that faces the United States, the West-
ern Hemisphere, and the free world.
The important cities and military instal-
lations of the United States mainland
are now open to Soviet attack by con-
ventional weapons, eliminating the
necessity for building large stores of long
range Russian weapons.
The island's proximity to the United
States makes it an ideal base from which
our radio and television frequencies can
.be jammed. Evidence indicates the
strong possibility that Cuba is already
being used as a base for Russian sub-
marines. But of equal importance, or
perhaps of more importance at this junc-
ture of American history, is the obvious
fact that this island is a launching pad
for subversion for the entire Western
Hemisphere, and particularly for Cen-
tral and South America.
The evidence is also overwhelming
that Cuba is being used as a training
school for subversion. An 8-nation com-
mittee of the Organization of American
States recently wrote a 60-page report
proving the existence of this threat and
describing the extent of its progress.
The report states :
Undoubtedly Cuba now constitutes the
regional center for subversive action by in-
ternational communism in America.
The report adds:
It Is no exaggeration to say that Cuba has
now been converted into a Soviet military
camp. It is also clear that Cuba Is being
used as a base for training in communism
and for the spread of communism.
Pedro G. Beltran, former Prime Min-
ister of Peru, recently gave a vivid picture
of the results of this increase in sub-
version coming from Cuba. Speaking
before the Catholic Press Association of
the United States and Canada, he said:
Cuba has thus become a model campus
of the modern college for subversion of the
Americas. The Communists are mounting
an attack on our countries from within.
How can you expect to control this sort of
indoctrination and infiltration? The boys
who are taken to Cuba, whether from Peru,
Bolivia, Colombia, and Ecuador or any of
these countries, need no passport in order to
travel. Once they are over the border, Cas-
tro agents furnish them with money and
transportation. They are welcomed to Ha-
vana without documents and when they
leave they are provided with forged passports
which do not mention their stay in Cuba.
Certainly they will not return home through
regular channels. The fact is that as long
as the Russians are in Cuba, it will continue
to be a model campus of the modern college
for subversion of the Americas.
The same story of subversion can be
written about any Latin America coun-
try. The OAS report I referred to be-
fore estimates that there are now more
than 250,000 Communist Party members
in Latin America. Of these, only about
60,000 are reported to be in Cuba.
There are many changes in policy that
would, in my opinion, strengthen our
world position, reestablish our leadership
in the Western Hemisphere, and which
would remove "Subversion University"
from our back doorstep.
First, it is imperative that we as a peo-
ple, and as a government, put ourselves
unequivocally and unflinchingly on the
side of the Cuban people who are willing
to fight for their freedom. I recently
talked to a large number of political
exiles at Guantanamo Naval Base. Their
message was clear and convincing:
Help us get Khrushchev out of Cuba and
we will take care of Castro ourselves.
It is unfortunate that it is necessary
for this Nation to make a declaration
such as this, measured against the prin-
ciples of liberty that presided at our
birth and that have been our heritage.
There should be no question that we sup-
port those who fight for freedom and
oppose those who live and rule by
tyranny. This has always been our na-
tional purpose.
I suggest that this evening you go down
to Haines Point and read the firm, un-
equivocating pledge of Thomas Jefferson,
inscribed in that magnificent memorial,
for all to see and savor:
I have sworn upon the altar of God
Eternal, hostility against every form of
tyranny over the mind of man.
Unfortunately, our past actions re-
garding Cuba bear bitter fruit. The
abandonment of our demands for on-site
inspections, the apparent willingness to
accommodate ourselves to Communist
control of Cuba, the chastisement of
Cuban exile groups, the. forsaking of the
clear-cut intent and meaning of the
Monroe Doctrine-all these individual
actions form a composite picture that
leaves serious doubt as to how far we will
actually go to defend freedom in this
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved,, , T1 ,%iORDM@gt383R000200250020-3 July 29
12822
Such a declaration of support for those
Cuban patriots would serve notice to the
world that we are ready to reassume the
robes of leadership. It would do much
more-it would serve notice to those
brave Cuban people that they do not fight
[In tons I
185$ - -- -- ---------- "--
5,610,600
1959----------------------------
5,788,100
1960 ---------------------------
5.888, 900
1961----------------- -----------
6,567,800
1962----------------------------
4.603,100
1963 (estimated) ----------------
3,000,000
Communist Party Secretary Felipe
Torres said :
Volunteers are deserting their labor and
even those staying in the canefields are re-
fusing to work.
On April 30, 1963, Minister of Industry
Ernesto Guevara described the frustra-
tion that besets the Communist leaders
when he stated almost plaintively:
We must look carefully to find out where
the canecutters have deserted to.
No less than Raul Castro has said:
We have an economic problem of the great-
est nature. The regime mobilized 50,000
workers from other jobs and sent them to
the fields as permanent volunteer canecut-
ters but despite their help and despite every-
thing we have not been able to maintain
normal sugar grinding.
alone and that their cause does not go Castro first came to power in January
unnoticed at our counsel tables. 1959. Only seven sugar mills were seized
One of tlic has shortcomings of our t by him in this year, so most of the sugar
o our apparent was produced under private industry.
foreign policy has been o the undeniable
ignorathat nce there is progress today, at In 1960, following the harvest, Castro
ths very there is in m rees today. It confiscated all the mills, and in 1961 he
this is very mThenC Castro revolt declared free operation-no quotas-and
in Cuba. The Case movement has every stalk of cane was cut. Consc-
theed portly and miserably people. Cuba quently, the 1962 crop, harvested in 1963,
the support a the Cuban people. Cuba was the first Communist sugar harvest.
was no a s "stomach communism" That crop was less than half the peak
initially y as many people le mistakenly y be- production of 1961.
lieve. Rather, Castro's rise to power and The means by which this reduction in
with him communism, was
caused being willing the production occurred is a story of courage
middle the benefits is of being cawing to and ingenuity. Much of the sabotage
accept the benefits Of freedom without has been accomplished through the ele-
assuming the attendant responsibilities. mentary process of setting the caneflelds
It seems inconceivable that our foreign on fire. One successful technique is a
policy architects, do not appreciate fully vignette of persistence. The peasants
the valiant struggle being waged every catch rats, tie a rag to the tall, soak It in
and patriots, yet no evidence of that
awareness is manifest. These Cuban
liberty fighters desperately need physical
help-food, arms, ammunition-the tools
of guerrilla warfare. In the absence of
that help, they are equally desperate for
our moral support. They need to know
that in spirit we are fighting by their
side, yet they have not received that
assurance.
The story of those fighting for free-
dom in Cuiba, a David and Goliath battle,
is an inspiring one. In order to put this
story into proper perspective. I think we
must look at the earlier Castro-led re-
volution. It is not correct to assume
that the pre-Castro Cuba was a nation
of impoverished peasants, on the brink
of mass revolt. This is a beguiling no-
tion, but It simply is not right. Pre-
Castro Cuba was no paradise, no homeof
eonomic and social democracy, but
e
gasoline, set it afire and send the rat
scurrying through the fields. The Im-
mediate result? As if by magic a series
of fires will spring up in various parts of
the fields, destroying sugar. The long-
range result? Another blow to Commu-
nist control.
The government of Las Villas Province
recently admitted that 5 million arro-
bas of cane had been burned. Since
one arroba equals 25 pounds of sugar,
the sabotage efforts of Cuban peasants
in a single province translate into 125
million pounds of sugar.
Another means of sabotage used by
counterrevolutionaries is the simple
technique of refusing to work. The
effect of this "stay away" strike is most
apparent in the operation of the sugar
grinding machinery. Once the grind-
ing machine starts during the sugar sea-
son it is necessary that it stay in constant
neither was It a sink of poverty and ing is completed. It becomes econom-
misery. Its per capita income was much ically prohibitive to start and stop the
higher than that of post-war Japan and machines. Yet the reports of delays
about on a par with post-war Italy. that are heard over the Communist radio
Many of these peasants no doubt were network tell the story of Communist fail-
misled by the demogogic Castro who ure. For a single example, this report
represented that they were at that time was heard from Dos Amigas in Oriente
fighting for their individual liberty, when Province :
in fact the Communist conspiracy was Closed. Time lost, 24 hours. Reason: no
lurking in the wings. cane cutters.
Cuban resistance started almost the Total time lost for February and March,
day the true facts were known. As early 500 hours.
as December 14, 1960, Castro proudly an- Each of these delays, and there are
nounced that all counter revolutionaries hundreds of them, demonstrate the fail-
had been wiped out. He has made the ure of the Communist Party to terrorize
same claim several times in the past 2 the Cuban peasant into submission.
years. Yet the current revolt persists Conversely, it is notice to all who will
and grows in size. look, that these people are fighting and
Castro himself is authority for the will continue fighting tyranny.
proof of its growth. On June 18 and Testimony to the success of the revolt
again on June 27 of this year, he an- comes from the top Cuban officials them-
nounced that half the counterrevolu- selves. Rigoberto Fernandes, the head
t.ionary bands In one province had been of the regime's so-called "labor service"
eliminated-14 in number. Accepting said that even the "volunteers" were
Castro's statement at face value, simple sabotaging the caneflelds. "It is neces-
mathematics indicate 14 bands of pa- sary to rotate volunteer sugarcane cut-
triots remain in this single province-and ters and laborers, then put others who do
there are 6 other provinces in Cuba. not resist to cutting the cane. We will
The story of this sabotage is revealed in not continue the dangers that cause the
cold facts. Listed below are the sugar loss of grinding of sugar and put our
production figures for the last 6 years: revolution in danger," he stated.
Finally I cite the bearded leader.
Fidel Castro made the following state-
inent on return from his recent visit to
Russia. It takes no great insight to im-
agine the conversation between Castro
and Khrushchev that prompted this re-
mark:
We have not complied with our sugar
commitments for various reasons known to
all of us. We have an unfavorable trade
balance of $200 million a year.
The same story of sabotage can be
written concerning the other Cuban
crops. In 1958 the tobacco production
was 628 million units for export and
domestic consumption. In 1959, Castro's
first year of power, production fell to
322 million units and exports fell from
79.8 million to 69.8 million units. In
1960, exports dropped to 54.6 million
units, and in 1961 they fell to 32.7 million
units. An article in Cuba Socialista, an
official government magazine, said:
The export of cheap tobacco has fallen
during 1961 and 1962 to a level of about 33
million cigars with a value of only $6 mil-
lion.
The production of coffee is not a major
crop for Cuba, but an interesting story
lies in this area. Coffee is produced in
the mountainous region of Cuba, best
suited to counterrevolutionary activities.
At first, the peasants broke the limbs off
the coffee trees and production dropped
to almost nothing. Consequently, the
Castro government has moved these peo-
ple to the collective farms on the plains
and sent city workers to the mountains.
They still are not trusting of them, how-
ever, so they work In groups of not larger
than 10. Of the 10 workers, the No. 1
worker is a government man, the No. 2
is a Cuban G-2 employee, and the third
is a Young Communist. The production
of coffee has not increased despite these
measures.
Even In this sea of heartbreak, there
are Islands of humor, caused by the
Communist frustration. Recently this
story appeared in the Communist Cuban
paper "Hay." The column called "A
Thousand Eyes" reports that a comrade
on duty In a warehouse was cleaning his
boots. He was using gasoline. Then he
lit a cigarette and inadvertently threw
the lighted match directly into the gas
can, causing a fire of $100,000 magnitude.
The article tersely cautioned against
such negligence.
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963 F Approved For R~l x?RJL CAi~4A5B0~~M00200250020-3 12823
If there is a doubt about the effective-
ness of this sabotage activity by the
Cuban people, consider Castro's repres-
sive order 988:
Anyone caught burning cane, giving one
mouthful of food to Cuban revolutionary
bands or giving assistance to guerrilla bands
is to be shot within 48 hours.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I have to-
day written a letter to Secretary of State
Rusk as follows:
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: Evidence- clearly
shows that Cuban patriots are in an im-
pressive stage of revolt against Castro's
Communist government. Will you send to
me the nonclassified mass of evidence your
Department has compiled, detailing the ex-
tent of this revolt? I also ask that you make
this information available to the people of
the United States and to the world. I make
this request for the following reasons:
1. Freedom's fight, whether it be heralded
by the boom of cannons on the battlefield, or
the lonely stillness of sabotage and guerrilla
warfare, should be told. The world should
know when there is concerted, effective op-
position to the Communist- conspiracy.
2. Those Cubans who are fighting need to
know that you and the American people are
aware of their valiant efforts. Since last
October we have not indicated by our actions
that their fight is our fight.
3. The people of the Latin American coun-
tries who are subjected to Communist sub-
versions with ever-increasing intensity
should know what their Cuban neighbors,
already under the Soviet fist, are doing to
rid themselves of its punishment. They
will be awakened to the danger before it is
too late.
4. The American people should know the
fight is being waged. We need desperately
to affirm our determined opposition to Soviet
intrusion in our hemisphere. Our "wait and
see" policy, coupled with prominent domes-
tic issues have driven the Cuban problem
from the front pages. Yet who can deny
the stake the American people have in a
correct solution? You and I am working
for them-they have a right to know.
5. This disclosure, accompanied by the
firm declaration that we are on the side of
the Cuban people fighting Castro will serve
notice to the world that we are ready to re-
assume leadership for the cause of liberty,
freedom, and dignity of man.
Mr. WEAVER. I thank the gentle-
man from Colorado.
Mr. SELDEN. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. WEAVER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Alabama.
Mr. SELDEN. Mr. Speaker, I would
like to commend the gentleman. from
Pennsylvania [Mr. WEAVER] and those
who have joined in continuing the call the
attention of the Congress and the Amer-
ican people to the dangers of a Comrnu-
nist base existing here in the Western
Hemisphere. The gentleman from Colo-
rado [Mr. BROTZMAN] who just concluded,
called to the attention of the House a
report issued recently by the Organiza-
tion of American States.
I would like to remind the gentleman
and the Congress of the hearings con-
ducted in February and early March by
the Subcommittee on Inter-American
Affairs of the House Foreign Affairs
Committee on Castro-Communist sub-
version in the Western Hemisphere and
the report that was issued following those
hearings.. In that report, the subcom-
mittee members pointed out that while
Latin America has been a. target for
Communist conquest since the early
1920's with the coming into power of
Fidel Castro in Cuba in 1959 the existence
of an operational base in the heartland
of the Americas brought a grave new
dimension to the Communist threat to
the inter-American system.
From its inception the Castro regime
has sought to export revolution to other
countries of the hemisphere. Direct
military efforts, in the form of small rebel
force landings in the hemisphere, failed
in 1959. Cuba then rapidly became a
base for subversion and guerrilla train-
ing, as well as propaganda campaigns
aimed at the overthrow of existent Latin
American governments.
By 1960, Soviet and outside Commu-
nist influence and control over the Cas-
tro revolutionary apparatus had become
obvious. In December 1961, when the
Cuban dictator proclaimed his allegiance
to the Marxist-Leninist doctrine, his ap-
peal to indigenous non-Communist ele-
ments in Latin America diminished, but
the campaign to export revolution by
subversive aggression was intensified.
This stepped-up campaign continues to
be carried out by three basic means:
First, exploitation of nationalist and ul-
tra leftist groups; second, the dissemina-
tion of propaganda; and, third, the in-
tensive ideological indoctrination. and
development of antigovernment forces
through guerrilla training.
These and other observations are con-
tained in the subcommittee's report,
which I mentioned a few moments ago,
as well as recommendations which sub-
committee members felt would be help-
ful in combating subversive activities
throughout the hemisphere. I commend
to the Members of the House both the
printed hearings on Castro-Communist
subversion in the Western Hemisphere,
and the report that followed those hear-
ings.
I thank the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. WEAVER] for yielding me this
time.
Mr. WEAVER. I thank the gentleman
from Alabama [Mr. SELDEN].
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speaker,
will the gentleman yield for one com-
ment?
Mr. WEAVER. Yes, I yield to the
gentleman from Florida.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I just want
to say I know of no Member who has
been more diligent in trying to do some-
thing about this Cuban problem than
the gentleman from Alabama [Mr.
SELDEN]. His work, as chairman of the
Subcommittee on Latin America of the
Committee on Foreign Affairs is a posi-
tion where he has been able to become
knowledgeable on what is being done and
what is not being done, and certainly his
leadership has been helpful in trying to
bring some positive policy into so many
things that need to be done. I certainly
want to join with other Members of the
House in commending his strong interest
and leadership.
Mr. WEAVER. I too commend the
gentleman from Alabama for his leader-
ship and wise comment on this subject.
Mr. YOUNGER. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield for one comment?
Mr. WEAVER. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. YOUNGER. The other day when
Castro announced he was going to con-
fiscate our Embassy I checked with the
State Department to find out whether
any such attack had ever been made on
any of our Embassies. They came up
with the report that only in one instance
was it done, in Vietnam when the Jap-
anese moved in, they did take over tem-
porarily our Embassy in Saigon. How-
ever, in no other case did it happen. The
Germans did not bother our Embassy
during the war. The Italians did not
bother it and neither did the Japanese
in Tokyo. Even the Chinese have not
made a move at all toward our Embassy.
It seems to me this is a direct attack on
the United States just the same as if they
attacked Miami, or Washington, or any
other part of the United States, because
that Embassy is the United States.
I certainly regret that our President
and our Secretary of State have not
made a very strong and determined ef-
fort to see that if this confiscation is go-
ing to proceed, then I think we have to
take some direct action.
Mr. WEAVER. I thank the gentle-
man from California for his observa-
tions.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that the gentleman from Florida [Mr.
GIBBONS] be yielded 40 minutes so he
may in turn yield to other Members of.
Congress on the subject of the cold war
in Cuba.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gentleman
from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I wish
to thank the gentleman from Penn-
sylvania [Mr. WEAVER] for yielding me
this time. I want to compliment my
colleagues for the very forceful and cer-
tainly the very nonpartisan attitude that
has been displayed here this afternoon
in discussing this problem which is not
just a problem of this administration
or of Florida, or of the United States,
but is a problem of the whole free world.
It is not just a problem of our State De-
partment, nor of the Senate of the
United States, but it is also a problem
of this body. It behooves all of us to use
our most constructive thoughts and to
manage our time so that we will bring to
bear on this most sensitive subject and
on this most important subject the best
thoughts of this body. It is with this
i- mind that I make a few remarks be-
fore I yield, about the possibilities and
the probabilities and the desirabilities
of recognizing a provisional government,
or a government in exile to represent the
Cuban people during this very strenuous
time. I know that many people have
said that this is an unwise decision to
make; that we should not get involved
with any group of refugees, or with any
other people in trying to set up some
government to represent them while
Castro is in power.
But after having read all of their argu-
ments and after having read the argu-
ments on the other side, and based upon
some personal experience that I have
had in working in this type of situation
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved Ferj I eS Q/9& f3DP J 3R000200250020-3 , July 29
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that it would
be most wise and most desirable for
this country to recognize some provi-
sional government to represent these
exiles and to represent the people inside
of Cuba who are seeking freedom. I
believe, Mr. Speaker, that this would
be a step toward unity.
I know that in the city of Miami there
are as many as 25 different exile groups,
freedom-loving groups that need direc-
tion and maintenance and stability. I
know in my own city there are freedom-
loving groups of Cuban refugees and
first generation Cubans who would like
to work together in throwing off Castro-
ism in our hemisphere. But all of these
people seem to be milling around and
looking to someone else for leadership.
I say that that leadership must be found
within them; it is within the people who
are now temporary visitors in our coun-
try as exiles and the people who are
fighting inside of Cuba, as Mr. BROTZ-
MAN so ably pointed out, who will have
to bring some direction and some stabil-
ity to this movement.
Of course, it would be much better
if we could recognize a provisional gov-
ernment inside of Cuba. Maybe a few
months or a few years ago this would
have been possible, but it will not help
us at all today to think about the past.
We must think about the future. If
it is impossible, and it is probably im-
possible, to recognize this provisional
government In exile on the island of
Cuba, certainly we should assist these
people to try to set up under some dem-
ocratic process here in this country or
in one of the other Latin-American
countries, a unified front to oppose Cas-
tro. This provisional government would
Include within its people who are now
on the island of Cuba and those who
are now outside the island of Cuba. A
provisional government would help in
establishing a sound situation in Cuba
after Castro leaves or after we have
run Castro out of that area. It could
set out clearly the alms and the ob-
jectives and the principles for which a
new and free Cuba would stand. It
could set forth what would be done
about bringing about a firmer economy
on the island of Cuba; what would be
done about free elections in Cuba; what
would be done about the whole cause of
freedom in Cuba. A provisional govern-
ment could establish a positive Ideologi-
cal attack upon this cancer that resides
in the island.
This government In exile or this pro-
visional government, once set up, could
establish through democratic processes
its own leaders. It could, by the use of
means of communication, radio and
printed material, take the message of
freedom and coordinate the message of
freedom and fight for freedom on the
island. It would be such an agency to
i,hich this country could legitimately
under International law and under the
laws of this country render substantial
economic and military aid.
But all this would not be enough. In
addition to this, it is my though that
we in the Congress and we in America
must think about what is going to hap-
pen once we get rid of Castro.
I- believe that the whole area of Cen-
tral and South America, as was ably
pointed out in the hearings of the Sub-
committee on Inter-American Affairs of
the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
this last February and March, Is ripe for
revolution. It is no longer a question of
supplying South Americans with the
guns, aims, and ammunition to carry on
a revolution, because about 65 very vio-
lent and scmiviolent revolutions have oc-
curred in Central and South America
since the end of World War II and they
already have all of the arms and ammu-
nition that they need.
From reading the hearings and listen-
ing to the testimony of Mr. John Me-
Cone, Mr. Martin, and others, It Is obvi-
ous that the Central and South Ameri-
can people already have the guns to carry
on any kind of revolution they want to.
But we have arms enough here in our
country to prevent the spread of com-
munism into Central and South America,
but the real question is, Do we have the
ideological strength, do we have the de-
termination to keep communism out of
Central and South America? I think
we do. but I think we need to take con-
structive steps to keep it out.
One of the constructive steps I should
like to suggest would be a vast speedy
and expansion of our cultural and edu-
cational exchange program in Central
and South America. I know that
through the Alliance for Progress, the
Peace Corps, and the State Department
we are now carrying on these programs,
but the programs unfortuately are not
enough. They are not adequately fi-
nanced, and that Is the responsibility of
this Congress.
It seems to me we can also introduce
a new program, a program designed to
get very quickly to the minds and the
hearts of the future leaders of Central
and South America by establishing a
program that would go to the educators,
the teachers, the instructors particularly
in the secondary schools of Central and
South America, to bring them to this
country in an exchange program. We
have brought college professors here
with some success, but let us bring the
secondary teachers here to demonstrate
to them how freedom works in our coun-
try, to help them take the message of
freedom and a free economy back to
those very fine minds that are In the
secondary schools In the Americas.
We have seen through the American
Field Services Program demonstrated in
this country the fine exchange program
where students come here fromall over
the world as well as the Americas to live
in the homes of America. I have seen
this is a very wonderful program in
action. I urge the continuation, the re-
inforcement, and the expansion of this
type of program. We can Invite those
students of high school age, high school
seniors particularly, before they go to
college, to live here, toseefreedom as It
actually works, to live in American
homes. I know there are many Ameri-
can homes that will welcome the students
and have welcomed them. In this way
we will have an opportunity of planting
in the minds of these future leaders the
spirit or our wonderful American revolu-
tion of freedom and equality.
I am ashamed to say that in a nation
where we can sell soap, cigarettes, whis-
ky, and other things better than any
other nation in the world yet we have ne-
glected the opportunity to sell the mes-
sage of the wonderful American revolu-
tion, this freedom revolution, throughout
the world, and particularly throughout
Central and South America. It chagrins
me to recognize that while we are mili-
tarily strong and yet we are not ideolog-
ically strong and have not used our
ingenuity and our wealth to spread this
message of freedom.
We, the Congress, have failed to give
to the USIA, for instance, sufficient
money for its needs. Yet we spend more
money for one nuclear submarine than
we spend on the whole information and
education program throughout the world
of spreading this idea of what American-
ism and what freedom really is. I
think we need to change this approach.
We must step up our program of infor-
mation, education, and cultural echange
with the Americas. We can do this by
bringing in more Latin American stu-
dents and teachers and sending them
more of our students and teachers. We
must also step up our program in the
Americas for the ideological attack for
freedom through the USIA and other
agencies.
The responsibility of supporting these
programs and for creating new ones rest
with this Congress. We must not fail.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I yield such time
as he may need to the gentleman from
Washington [Mr. STINSON].
Mr. STINSON. I thank the gentle-
man from Florida for yielding at this
point.
Mr. Speaker, Cuba's economic life is
vitally dependent on certain major ex-
ports and a vast number of imports.
The current difficulties in the realization
of its ambitious industrialization pro-
gram show that the country is extremely
vulnerable to any interruption of the
flow of foreign trade. Whenever it has
been possible to collect facts on Cuban
trade, it has become abundantly clear
that the Communist world is unable to
supply all of the basic essentials so des-
perately needed by Cuba. In pre-Castro
days, the United States functioned as
major supplier and purchaser of Cuban
needs and exports. Now that the United
States embargo on Cuban exports and
Imports is in operation and the Sino-
Soviet world cannot supply Cuba's needs,
many free world countries have stepped
In to take a percentage of Cuban trade.
The United States has asked its free
world partners to assist in enforcing the
embargo, but significant cooperation on
the part of the free world countries has
been disappointing.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
at this point to include a list of these
66 countries that are currently trading
with Cuba.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Li-
BONATI). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
There was no objection.
The countries referred to are as fol-
lows:
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963 Approved For Re "R?RVNALCI~hLTJit1JBU NO ISE 0200250020-3
United States, Aden, Austria, Belgian- FLAG OF REGISTRY, NAME OF SHIP-Con.
Luxembourg, Denmark
Finland
Franc
,
,
e, British-Continued Gross tonnage
West Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland,
Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portu
S
d
Overseas Explorer (tanker) -------
gal, Spain, Overseas Pioneer (tanker)
16, 267
16
267
we
en, Switzerland, Australia,
Cambodia, Pampas
,
Ceylon, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Malaya,
New Zeal
d
P
ki
-------------------------
Shienfoon___________
7,589
7
127
an
,
a
stan, Thailand, Vietnam,
Ar
entina
P
____________
Silverforcel---------
,
8
058
g
,
anama, Surinam, Uruguay,
United Ki
d
----- .-------
Silverlakel------
,
8
058
ng
om, Canada, Israel, Sudan,
Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Malta
Syria
Al-
----------------
Tulse Hill_______________________
,
7, 120
,
,
geria, Chad, Guinea, Morocco, Rhodesia-
N
asaland
S
l
Vercharmian------------ -------
Vergmont 1-----
7,265
7
381
y
,
enega
, South Africa, Tunisia,
Brazil, British Guiana, Chile, Colombia
-----------------
West Breeze_____________________
,
8,718
,
Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador
Honduras
Yungfutary----------------------
5,388
,
,
Jamaica, Mexico, Netherland Antilles, Nica-
Yunglutaton 1-------------------
5,414
ragua, Peru, Trinidad, Venezuela.
Zela M--------------------------
7,237
Mr. STINSON. Many of the nations
of the world have also been providing
the necessary ships and aircraft to carry
on the trade and passenger transport so
essential to the survival of communism
in Cuba.
Mr. Speaker, at this point I ask unan-
imous consent to include a list of ship-
ping that has been going into Cuba, as
provided by the Department of Com-
merce.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
LIBONATI). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
There was no objection.
The list referred to is as follows:
LIST OF FREE WORLD AND POLISH FLAG VES-
SELS ARRIVING IN CUBA SINCE JANUARY 1,
1963
(Rept. No. 10)
SECTION 1. "Pursuant to the National Se-
curity Action Memorandum No. 220, dated
February 5, 1963, addressed to the Secretary
of State; the Secretary of Defense; the Secre-
tary of Agriculture; the Secretary of Com-
merce; the Administrator, Agency for Inter-
national Development; and the Administra-
tor, General Services Administration, con-
cerning U.S. Government shipments by
foreign-flag vessels in the Cuban trade, the
Maritime Administration is making available
to the appropriate Departments the follow-
ing list of vessels which have arrived in Cuba
since January 1, 1963, based on information
received through June 14, 1965, exclusive
of those vessels that called at Cuba on U.S.
Government-approved noncommercial voy-
ages and those listed in section 2:
FLAG OF REGISTRY, NAME OF SHIP
Gross tonnage
Total, all flags "(118 Ships)_ 961,368
British (37 ships) ________________ 355,354
Ardgem-------------------------- 6,981
Ardmore------------------------ 4,664
Ardrowan-------------- _-------- 7,300
Arlington Court ------------------ 9, 662
Athelcrown (tanker) ------------- 11,149
Athelduke (tanker) -------------- 9,089
Atheimere (tanker) ------------- 7,524
Athelmonarch (tanker) ---------- 11, 182
Atheisultan (tanker) ------------- 9, 149
Avisfaith------------------------ 7,868
Chipbee---------------- -------- 7,271
Fir Hill------------------------- 7,119
Hazelmoor---------------------- 7,907
Ho Fung----------------------- 7, 121
Ivy Fair------------------------- 7,201
Linkmoor----------------------- 8, 236
London Confidence (tanker)--_, 21,699
London Independence (tanker)__ 22,643
London Majesty (tanker) -------- 12,132
London Pride (tanker) ---------- 10,776
London Splendour (tanker) ------ 16,195
London Victory (tanker) --------- 12, 132
Lord Gladstone__________________ 11,299
Maratha Enterprise-------------- 7,166
AegaionI ----------------------7,239
Aldebaran (tanker) -------------- 12,897
Americana ----------------------- 7,104
Apollon------------------------- 9,744
Capetan Petros__________________ 7,291
Despoiria------------------------ ; 5,006
Efcharisl________________--_--__- 7,249
Eftychial------------------------ 7,223
Embassy ------------------------- 8,418
Galini--------------------------- 7,266
Gloria------------------------- 7,128
Hydraios III______________ _______ 5,239
King Theseus___________________ 5,153
Kyra Hariklia____________________ 61888
Maria Santa____________________ 7,217
Mastro-SteliosII----------------- 7,282
14orth Empress___________________ 10,904
North Queen 1------------ .------- 9,341
Pamit--------------------------- 3.929
Pantanassa______________________ 7,131
Penelope------------------------ 6,712
Perseus (tanker) ----------------- 15,852
Pollux 1_______ -------------------------- 9,956
Polyxenix------------------------ 7,143
Redestos------------------------- 5,911
Seirios-------------------------- 7,239
Sirius (tanker) ------------------ 16,241
Stylfanos N. Vlassopulos_________ 7,244
Timios Stavros 1---------- .------- 5,269
Western Trader ------------------ 9,268
Lebanese (19 ships) ......
.......... 125,869
Akamas
------------
Aiolos II------------------
Antonis
-----------
Astir 1
----------------------
Carnation ____________
Giorgos Tsakiroglou___________
Ilena -
------------
Kalliopi D. Lemos l
Malou--------------
------------
Mantrio-------------------------
Mousse Noelle
Noemi
Olga
Parmarina---------------
Razani -
St. Anthonyl-______-_ -
-----------
St. Nicolas
Vassiliki 1
7, 285
7, 256
6, 259
5, 324
4,884
7, 240
5, 925
5, 103
7,145
7, 255
8, 984
7,251
7, 070
7, 199
6,721
7, 253
5,349
7, 165
7, 192
Italian 7 ships
( ) 53,415
Achille - 6.950
Annalisa--------------- 2, 479
Arenella--------------, 7,183
Cannaregio_____----------------- 7, 184
Linda Giovanna (Tanker) -------- 9, 985
Nazareno------------------------ 7, 173
San Nicola
(Tanker) ------------- 12,461
Polish (7 ships) ___________________ 44,734
Baltyk
Bialystok
Bytom
Chopin Chorzow 1
--------------`---
Kopalnia Miechowice 1
Piast
Footnote at end of table.
6,963
7, 173
5, 967
6, 987
7, 237
7, 223
3,184
12825
FLAG OF REGISTRY, NAME OF SHIP-Con.
Gross tonnage
Norwegian (6 Ships)_______________ 58,359
Benny Viking (now Benny)______ 3,857
Kongsgaard (Tanker) ------------ 19, 999
Lovdal (Tanker) 1---------------- 12, 764
Ole Bratt----------------------- 5,252
Polyclipper (tanker)_____________ -11,737
Ti.ne---------------------------- 4,750
Yugoslav (5 ships)________________ 25,841
Bar---------------------- 7,233
Cavtat-------------------------- 7,266
Cetinje 1------------------------ 7,200
Dugi Otok---------------------- 6,997
Trebisnjica______________________ 7,145
Spanish (2 ships) ----------------- 4,565
Castillo Ampudia________________ 3, 566
Sierra Madre
Swedish (2 ships) --------------- 14,295
Dagmar------------------------- 6,490
Atlantic Friend 1________________ 7, 805
German (West) (1 ship: Adolf
Leonhardt----------------------- 7,066
Japanese (1 ship) : Meishun Maru__ 8, 647
Moroccan (1 ship): Toubkal_______ 8,748
1 Added to Rept. No. 9 appearing in Fed-
eral Register issue of June 6, 1963.
SEC. 2. in accordance with the provisions
of National Security Action Memorandum
No. 220 of February 5, 1963, the following
vessels which called at Cuba after January 1,
1963, have reacquired eligibility to carry
U.S. Government-financed cargoes from the
United States by virtue of the persons who
control the vessels having given satisfactory
certification and assurance that no ships un-
der their control will, thenceforth, be m-
pioyed in the Cuba trade so long as it re-
mains the policy of the U.S. Government to
discourage such trade:
(a) Since last report: None.
(b) Previous reports:
Flag of registry Number
of ships
British------------------------------ 1
Danish ------------------------------ 1
SEC. 3. The ships listed in sections 1 and
2 have made the following number of trips
to Cuba in 1963, based on. Information re-
ceived through June 14, 1963:
Flag of
registry
Greek________
Lebanese------.
Norwegian-----
Italian Yugoslav-----,,
Spanish,----:_
Danish_________
German________
(West.)
Japanese_______
Moroccan___
Swedish --------
TotaL____
Polish
5
4
1
i-
2
1
2
1
NOTE.--Trip totals in this section exceed ship totals in
secs. I and 2 because some of the ships made more than
1 trip to Cuba.
Mr. STINSON. Mr. Speaker, both
Spain and Mexico currently are flying
their transport aircraft into Cuba. in
addition, Communist Czechoslovakia also
has its airlines scheduled into Cuba.
One of the most effective ways to stifle
the Communist dictatorship in Cuba
would be to eliminate trade by the na-
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved CUR; ft(~1/ DP
19826 PUM83R000200250020-3 July ,29
..
tions of the free world to which we are Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman is in understanding why the administra-
currently giving our foreign aid. If we families with the fact, and it has dis- tion has not taken a more positive stand
were to ask nations in the free world to turbed me, that a number of amend- in this respect, I believe we should put
stop trade and shipping to Cuba, some of ments were passed to the 1963 Foreign this amendment into the foreign aid au-
their reactions would be that as long as Aid Appropriation Act which have not thorization bill but without an escape
the United States is shipping material to been followed, which have been openly clause and underscore the law, you might
Cuba that they will continue themselves. and notoriously violated. say, that has already been enacted.
However, if the United States were to I think it would be well at this point I further think we should bring this
cease shipping all material to Cuba and in the RECORDatO place them In the REc- to the attention of the American people
demand that other nations do the same, ORD. Public Law 87-872 provided very so that public opinion will be aroused
I believe that very rapidly we would see specifically that no foreign aid should to the point where they will demand
a complete cessation of trade by the free go to any country that did business with that this foreign aid be stopped to these
world with Cuba. Now that the ransom Castro and Cuba. The act flatly banned countries currently trading with Cuba.
deal has been completed with Cuba and U.S. aid to a country which permits any I thank the gentleman very much for
they have some $53 million of American ships under Its registry to carry to Cuba bringing this information at this time.
medical supplies and foodstuffs, I can see petroleum and certain other goods of a Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, will the Ben-
no reason why we should continue to military or strategic character. That tleman yield?
trade with them in any way. is an absolute ban. Mr. GIBBONS. I yield to the gentle-
There is a possibility that if we ask Mr. Speaker, I am sure, and the gen- man from Missouri.
some of the free nations of the world to tleman knows, that tankers from a num- Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, I, too, am
stop trading with Cuba that they might ber of free nations have been carrying very conscious of the facts that the gen-
not do so. Therefore, I am going to pro- and are now carrying-and have been tlemen have brought out on the floor of
pose an amendment to the foreign aid for th past 6 months-fuel to Cuba., in- the House concerning limitations to for-
authorization act that would suspend eluding the United Kingdom, Greece, eign aid appropriations. They have
all foreign aid for 1 year to any nation Italy, and Norway. However, the lan- done considerable work in reference to
that continues to trade or ship with Cuba guage of the law presents an absolute the United Nations technical programs
after 60 days after the passage of this ban on this. It is incomprehensible that and special fund aid that has gone in a
bill. This suspension would be renew- aid should continue to go to countries round about way to Cuba. They have
able if the nation continues trade or that send strategic materials to Cuba. introduced a bill in this House to limit
shipping to Cuba. It seems inconsistent The second provision in the act pro- such appropriations to the 331%3 percent
to the welfare of the United States that hibits economic aid to any country whft;h that prevails so far as the rest of the
we should help finance and support those sells, furnishes, or permits any ships un- United Nations are concerned.
nations who are trading and shipping to der its registry to carry items of eeo- I would like to compliment the gentle-
Cuba for profit. This is a peaceful, non- nomie assistance to Cuba unless the men on what they have brought forth
military, positive action that will be President determines that the withhold- today, then, to go back, in addition to
effective in curtailing communism in ing of such assistance would be contrary the remarks about the situation of for-
Cuba. I believe that this kind of positive to the national interest and reports such eign aid the gentleman from Washing-
leadership will be applauded by both na- determination to the Foreign Relations ton has so beautifully brought out, to
tions of the Western Hemisphere and and Appropriations Committees of the the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gis-
those nations throughout the world that mate and the Foreign Affairs and Ap- xoNsl, and his remarks about the cha-
believe that communism should be propriations Committees of the House of grin he feels about our lack of will and
stopped. Today, almost all of the free Representatives. the deterioration of our backbone and
world countries which are currently trad- Mr. Speaker, I have been informed the lack of our ideology in preventing
ing and shipping to Cuba are receiving authoritatively that no such notifica- these things, including the sanctity of
some form of American foreign aid. The tion of such request has been made to the Monroe Doctrine and many others.
Iron Curtain countries would have an ex- any of the committees mentioned. My The review that this group has brought
tremely difficult time in providing necessary is of administration
her mandate of concerning teveryth ng fthe rom ethe o er-
the various materials that t are They ar to the McCone report of the Sub-
would keep communism alive in Cu Cubaa. Tethe Congress of the United States as flights
would also be hard pressed to provide the passed in Public Law 87-872. Myself committee Armed orce a ednes of the Sell-
necessary shipping to preserve the trade and others have joined-I have just Aof Cuba. If the aircraft of those nations joined today in asking the General Ac- Unit Embassy baby Fo s funds Cuba's and the Castro and seizure of
the
who are receiving American aid did not counting Office to inquire into what our ed ed
fly into Cuba, the flow of Communist right the President has, if any, or the conspiracy in spite of all that the Swiss
agents to the free world would be greatly administration, to violate the mandate can do about It has been enlightening.
cuI of the Congress which prohibits foreign We pay tribute in spite of the old Amer-
In n addition, ddition, all nations currently per- aid funds from going to any country ican adage we would rise in our defense
mitting their ships and aircraft to travel that does business with Cuba and to but not one cent for tribute. We are the
to Cuba should be denied access to our determine what actions can be taken Nation that less ntc the seMarines
than the sei poll
harbors and airports. regarding these illegal expenditures of
These proposals are designed to pre- funds. of our Embassy in Havana, which is
vent the American taxpayer's money Does not the gentleman feel that any American property.
what
from going to those nations who would administration, be it this or any other, What to happened our to d the will, rmina wonhat
knowingly help to preserve a Communist which has a mandate from Congress has has happened fault of the rmina that
dictatorship just 90 miles from our with unequivocal language that the Wherein Representatives of the people
and
shores. Chief Executive has the duty in spending we Reliesies the
Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, will the funds to follow the mandate set out others do not seem to realize. We should
gentleman yield? by Congress which, of course, is an ex- cut off, as someone very clearly suggest-
Mr. GIBBONS. I would be glad to pression of the will of the people of ed, not only the food of Cuba but the
yield to the gentleman from Florida. the United States of America? Is not black gold that is flowing to Cuba in the
Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, I con- the gentleman disturbed, as I am, that form of oil.
gratulate the gentleman from Washing- this or any other administration would We made a good start on this and we
ton [Mr. STINSON] on his fine statement continue to permit trade by free nations should see, by all means, as the gentle-
with regard to trade with Cuba and ef- to whom we are giving foreign aid with man has beautifully said, that the Red
forts to curtail it. I also congratulate Castro's Communist government in di- Star in Cuba is in its descendancy and
the gentleman on his announcement of rot violation of the laws of the land? let brightness be In go ng over tht htrizon.ses careful to see at it his intention to introduce an amend- Mr. STINSON. I thank the gentle-
gentle-
mept to the foreign-ald bill which would to man for admit bringing up this point. I have Mr,
a very difficult time man. Many Sp people think that the moral
help accomplish this. .
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 12827
fiber of the American people has de-
teriorated to the point where they will
not fight anymore. I happen to disagree
with this philosophy. I believe the
American people are willing to fight to
remain free and have their children live
in freedom. I think if the decision were
to be made by the American people, we
would very rapidly see a very tough
policy advocated toward the Com-
munists in Cuba.
Mrs. FRANCES P. BOLTON. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GIBBONS. I yield to the gentle-
woman from Ohio.
Mrs. FRANCES P. BOLTON. I want
to thank all of you gentlemen who are
making possible this special order today.
It is high time that the two sides of the
aisle of this House join together in forc-
ing the administration into legitimate
action and seeing to it that they do not
go forward in illegitimate acts. Does
any of you have information relative to
the imprisonment of Cuban women? I
was waited upon the other day by a
woman who was a Cuban-she is now an
American, of course-and a Cuban.
They had a good deal to say about the
women who are imprisoned in Cuba and
who are being treated just awful. The
only other country that could compare
with the treatment was Turkey. I had
a friend in a Turkish prison for 3 years,
and the situation there was one that
could not be imagined. The only one
I have ever heard since then that could
be compared with the Turkish situation
is what is being done to these women.
I hope this group will look into the mat-
ter and see what can be done to acceler-
ate some sort of freedom and for some
kind of decent treatment for those
women down there.
I thank the gentleman very much for
yielding.
Mr. GIBBONS. I thank the gentle-
man from Washington [Mr. STINSON] for
his fine remarks.
Now I yield to my colleague from Flor-
ida, that very able and distinguished
gentleman [Mr. FUQUA] who has been
most active in this fight.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
gentleman from Florida has 13 minutes
remaining.
(Mr. FUQUA asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FUQUA. Mr. Speaker, I want to
thank my colleague from Florida and
my other colleagues who joined with us
today in this bipartisan effort to bring
to light some of the ways in which we
it has been said here earlier today in aid. They had one ship carrying 7,-
that Cuba's normal economic life de- 066 tons.
pends on certain major exports and im- Japan received $141.8 million in aid
ports coming into that country from and they had one ship carrying 8,657
other parts of the world. We have seen, tons.
since the Communist takeover in Cuba, Morocco received $49.8 million in aid.
the Soviet Union and other of their They had one ship carrying 8,748 tons.
Communist bloc countries that have These are our friends. Hence the ob-
tried to overcome this disruption by at- vious question has arisen as to why the
tempting to supply the essential foods United States continues to give aid to
and other essential goods that once came those countries who find themselves un-
from the United States,which was one of able to acquiesce in the U.S. request for
the greatest importers into Cuba. Cur- cooperation in the economic embargo
rently we have about 13 Communist against Cuba.
countries who are participating in about The large foreign aid this country has
75 to 80 percent of the total Cuban ex- been giving other countries, many of
port and import trade. Wherever we them still trading with Cuba, has re-
find the facts of the Cuban trade it is suited in our current problem with bal-
very clear that the Communist world is ance of payments. It was necessary for
unable to supply them and the cost is this country to borrow $500 million from
too high to supply the basic essentials the International Monetary Fund to as-
which are so desperately needed by the sist us through this crisis.
people of Cuba. Since the United States With all this in mind, how can we
placed an embargo on Cuban exports justify this aid to these countries who
and imports, the operations of the Sino- in turn aid our enemy?
Soviet world cannot supply many of the The time has now come that the Con-
vital needs to the people of Cuba. gress should take positive action by
The United States has time and time amending the Foreign Aid Authorization
again through our State Department Act to prohibit aid to these countries who
and other means asked our allies and continue to trade with Communist Cuba,
our partners of the free world to stop with our avowed enemy. I hope that the
trading with this Communist country. Congress will act, and I will support the
We tried to enforce through all types of amendment to the authorization act
moral persuasion, ways in which we can when it comes to the floor affecting these
stop this trading with our known enemy, countries that are receiving this aid.
one that has had missiles pointed at us Mrs. FRANCES P. BOLTCN. Mr.
in the October crisis and which has Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
caused the greatest amount of subver- Mr. FUQUA. I yield to the gentle-
sion in this hemisphere emanating from woman from Ohio.
that island. However, it has been said Mrs. FRANCES P. BOLTON. Mr.
this met with very disappointing success Speaker, that bill passed and what the
and that they continued to trade with gentleman is suggesting was supposed to
them. be done. The administration has been
I would like to cite you some figures told that they must stop giving aid to
of countries who are our allies in the those countries who are going against us
free world and cite the amount of trade in that particular manner. What can
they are doing with Cuba and the for- we do further to insist that the adminis-
eign aid that these countries are get- tration obey the law?
ting from this very country, the United Mr. FUQUA. I think we should pass
States, another amendment this time and make
We are feeding the hand that is feed- it very clear that they may not trade
ing our enemies. with these other countries. Perhaps we
Great Britain in the year 1962 re- should make it clearer than the amend-
ceived $27.5 million in foreign aid. In ment that we had to the Foreign Aid Au-
the time between January 1, 1963, and thorization Act of last year.
June 14, 1963, Great Britain had 37 ships Mrs. FRANCES P. BOLTON. I thank
carrying 355,354 gross tons into Cuba. the gentleman.
Greece, one of our other allies, re- Mr. WEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I yield
ceived $82.8 million in foreign aid. In the gentleman from Florida [Mr. GIs-
this same period of time, less than 6 soNs] an additional 10 minutes.
months, they had 30 ships carrying 244,- Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I wish
484 gross tons, to congratulate my able colleague from
Lebanon, receiving $.1 million in aid Florida [Mr. FUQUA] for those very fine
had 19 ships going into Cuba with 125,- and constructive remarks. He so ably
might rid ourselves of Communism not 860 tons.
only in Cuba but in the rest of this Italy, receiving $105.3 million in for-
hemisphere. eign aid had seven ships carrying 53,415
Mr. Speaker, we come here today not tons into Cuba.
as Democrats or Republicans, but we Poland-there is a question whether
come here as Americans. It is in this they are an ally or not, but they are
light I think that we should attack this receiving $8.1 million in foreign aid. In
problem which threatens the very foun- this same period they had 7 ships going
dation on which this country was into Cuba carrying 44,734 tons.
founded. President Kennedy said dur- Norway received $24.9 million in aid.
ing the October crisis in Cuba that the They had 6 ships going in carrying 58,-
greatest risk lies in not acting with deci- 359 gross tons.
siveness. Action is required. This I Yugoslavia had $116.7 million in aid.
think is the time for this country to They had 5 ships carrying 35,841 tons.
take decisive action in trying to rid Cuba Spain: $C7.5 million in aid. They had
and this hemisphere of godless Com- 2 ships carrying 4,565 gross tons.
munism. West Germany received $2.2 million
pointed out that this is not a question of
whether America must fight to do some-
thing about Cuba. As he so ably pointed
out, there are many things short of fight-
ing that we could do to turn this cold war
in our favor. I would urge my colleagues
not to be trapped by the old argument
that in order to do something construc-
tive we must fight or we must invade
Cuba. 'That is not the question.
The question is what other peaceful
and ideological means we can use to gain
freedom for the Cubans and for the rest
of the people in Central and South
America.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he
may require to the very able and distin-
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 'July -29
tuished gentleman from Illinois IMr.
RUMSFELD 1.
Mr. RUMSFELD. Mr. Speaker, I
thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker. I would like to congratu-
late the Members here today for their
continued interest and concern in the
problem of Cuba. Let me take a moment
or two to attempt to place the question
of Cuba in the context of the world
situation. I think there is a danger that
the discussion today could leave the im-
pression that some had a fixation on
Cuba, as has been charged against those
of us who have studied and concerned
ourselves with this problem. I believe
that the question of Cuba is much more
important than simply Cuba. It repre-
sents, I believe, one specific instance of
the serious problem which this Nation
has as a leader of the free world. I
would suggest that how we conduct our-
selves with respect to Cuba could do
much to determine the fate of the re-
mainder of this hemisphere and indeed
much of the world.
More than a century and a quarter
ago the French scholar. Alexis DeToc-
queville, visited our country and made
the following prophetic observation. He
said:
There are at the present time two great
nations in the world, which started from
different points, but seem to tend toward the
same end. I allude to the Russians and the
Americans. Both of them have grown up
unnoticed; and whilst the attention of man-
kind was directed elsewhere, they have sud-
denly placed themselves in the front rank
among the nations, and the world learned
of their existence and their greatness at
almost the same time. ? ? ? The American
struggles against the obstacles which nature
opposes to him; the adversaries of the Rus-
sians are men. The farmer combats the
wilderness and savage life, the latter civiliza-
tion with all its arms. The conquests of the
Americans are therefore gained by the plow-
share. Those of the Russians by the sword.
The Anglo-American relies upon personal
interest to accomplish his ends, and gives
free scope to the unguided strength and
commonsense of the people; the Russian
centers all the authority of society in a single
arm. The principal instrument of the
former Is freedom; and of the latter. servi-
tude. Their starting point is different and
their courses are not the same. Each of
them seems marked out by the will of Heaven
to sway the destinies of half the globe.
These were DeTocqueville's observa-
tions in 1832.
Just 20 years ago the Communist world
included 8 million Square miles of terri-
tory and 70 million people. Today it
includes 16 million square miles of terri-
tory and the number of human beings
behind the Iron Curtain is 970 million.
Within four decades communism has
grown from a gleam in Lenin's eye to
absolute domination of almost 1 billion
people. Historians will certainly ask the
questions why and how. I believe the
principal reason for these enormous
gains has been the Communists' ability
to conceive of this struggle for power
going on in the world today in larger
dimensions than the free world.
Through infiltration and control of
student groups, teachers unions, labor
organizations, schools, and political par-
ties, the Communists are able today to
achieve their goals by playing this multi-
headed network like an orchestra, vary-
ing the mode of approach-military,
paramilitary, political, psychological,
technological, and economic-to suit the
problem, the time, and the place. Their
weapons are of unlimited variety. In
short. they score victories in the cold
war because they know they are in it
and they have polished the weapons nec-
essary for victory.
Inexorably, bit by bit, more pieces of
the free world have been lost. When-
ever the West has won a round, as in
Korea or Lebanon, it was in the defense
of the status quo. When the Commu-
nists have won a round, as In Czechoslo-
vakia, China, Laos, or Cuba, they have
gained access to ground previously closed
to them.
The greatest need and the greatest
hope for the United States and the free
world today lies In the establishment
and maintenance of some stability in
the world, particularly In Latin America.
Today, however, words will no longer
achieve this stability. Much of the world
unfortunately believes, and with much
Justification, that the Communists very
possibly could ultimately win. Until the
United States changes this attitude, this
atmosphere, the pendulum will not swing
our way.
Today many smaller nations watch
and wait. Some are swinging to commu-
nism. To change this attitude, the Unit-
ed States must demonstrate a clear
desire and willingness to preserve free-
dom. I believe sincerely that our posture
with respect to Cuba will determine the
fate of all Latin America. We need
deeds to convince the walvering nations
of our resolution and that ultimately
freedom will prevail.
In a report from Freedom House, it
was stated that:
Americans are agreed that a Soviet Cuba
is Intolerable to the Western Hemisphere.
The reasons bear upon our security
and freedom as well as the independence
and integrity of the other nations in this
hemisphere.
The facts about Castro and Communist
Cuba are beyond debate. Six million people
who won their freedom from Batista's dic-
tatorship found themselves betrayed into the
hands of a new dictatorship. They are
denied the right to vote, to speak. to publish.
to think. More than 100,000 Cubans have
been jailed for refusing to accept commu-
nism. Another 250,000 have fled, preferring
exile to tyranny at home; 180,000 more are
awaiting transportation and countless others
dream of escaping terror.
Cuba has become an overt Soviet Satel-
lite-the only one in the Americas. The
Castro regime deliberately handed over the
island to the Russian dictator and allowed It
to be transferred into a launching pad for
potential aggression against the United
States and the other countries of this
hemisphere.
Present conditions do not suggest that the
evil has been abated much less eliminated.
Even if we could be certain that every of-
fensive military weapon has been removed
from Cuba we would still live in the presence
of the 20th century's most efficient offensive
weapon-communism itself. This time bomb
is still to be defused.
American policy must rest on three objec-
tives:
1. The elimination of the Soviet political
and military bases in Cuba;
2. The halting of Castro-Communist sub-
version. sabotage, and guerrilla warfare
against Latin-American peoples; and
3. The liberation of the Cuban nation
from Castro's brutal police state. Americans
will unite behind any program that gives
hope of achieving these goals.
There are many steps which can be
taken and should be taken and have not
been taken to achieve our common goals
in the cold war. Many have been men-
tioned today, and I will not belabor
them. They are sound and constructive,
but I would suggest that the first step
that must be taken, the step without
which all the others will be meaningless,
is for this Nation, the people of this
country, and the administration, to ad-
mit that we are In the cold war and to
demand policies that will meet the threat
that we face. Unless we as a nation, the
Congress, the, administration and the
people, take this step, all of these other
suggestions, as constructive, positive and
sound and worthwhile as they might be,
can amount to nothing.
I would congratulate the gentleman
from Florida [Mr. FUQUA], on his point
that the suggestion,as some claim, that
any step to stop the tide of Communist
aggression on this globe and to rid this
hemisphere of communism will result in
a nuclear holocaust or war, Is not sur-
ported by the facts. Each time this Na-
tion has stiffened its backbone, as in
October 1962, we have avoided war and
received the overwhelming support of the
free world.
As the President has said, and as his-
tory shows, the greatest risk of all may
very well be the failure to act, when
action Is necessary.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join with
my colleagues today to discuss this ques-
tion and to voice my concern, indeed,
alarm, with the drift of American foreign
policy. I congratulate them on their
thoughtful and responsible approach to
this difficult and complex problem. I
know that each of the Members here to-
day have been working for months, in-
deed years, on the problems of the cold
war.
I would like to call particular attention
by way of example to the gentleman
from Virginia [Mr. MARSIII who has la-
bored long, hard, and effectively to im-
prove national knowledge of the cold war
and is certainly recognized nationally as
an expert in this field. I consider it a
high privilege to serve in the Congress
with him.
Let us hope and indeed pray, in closing,
that when this body convenes next
month or next year, that Brazil or Haiti
or one or more of the other nations of
Latin America will not have fallen to the
Communists, whether by bluff or by war.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. GIBBONS. I thank the gentle-
man from Illinois for his very fine and
constructive remarks.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the
balance of my time to the gentleman
from Pennsylvania [Mr. WEAVER].
Mr. WEAVER. I thank the gentle-
man from Florida and the Members who
have spoken up to now. I now yield to
the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. PucrN-
SKI].
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963 Approved For E R / R .1@ 654Q(R2000200250020-3 12829
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise
to join in this discussion and to com-
mend the gentlemen who have arranged
today's discussion, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. WEAVER], the gentle-
man from Florida [Mr. FUQUA], the gen-
tleman from Florida [Mr. GIBBONS], the
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. MARSH],
the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. RuMs-
FELD], and the gentleman from Wash-
ington [Mr. STINSON].
Mr. Speaker, I think that the discus-
sion we have witnessed today, and are
witnessing now, can indeed make a tre-
mendous contribution toward a better
understanding of the vast problem that
lies ahead in the ultimate liberation of
Cuba from Communist rule.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congrat-
ulate these gentlemen for the bipartisan
effort that they have demonstrated here
today. I do not think they have tried to
dig into past closets looking for skele-
- tons, because indeed the road is full of
these skeletons. But, rather, they have
tried to discuss a positive program of
action. I think this is the way that
Cuba is ultimately going to be liberated.
Mr. Speaker, I for instance do not
agree with statements made here earlier
that we are having an aimless drift of
American foreign policy. On the con"
trary, I think this administration and
the previous administrations have tried
to meet this problem. They realized
that this is a problem of international
significance and certainly what we do
in Cuba-if we could isolate our problem
in Cuba just to Cuba, there would be no
question that two good battalions of
Marines could flush out Castro and his
communist hordes and the ball game
would be over-has worldwide reper-
cussions.
Mr. Speaker, nobody can certainly
question the fact that we Could if we
wanted to follow that path we could get
rid of Castro very quickly. However
as has been stated repeatedly by learned
scholars on the international scene, what
happens in Cuba has ramifications all
over the world. For this reason I think
the suggestions made here today are
certainly ones worthy of serious consi-
deration by the Congress.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from
Florida [Mr. ROGERS], has introduced
H.R. 7687, which provides, as follows:
That no article shall be transported in
interstate or foreign commerce to or from
the United States aboard vessels of any
foreign country which allows vessels sa:ling
under the flag of that country to be used,
on or after the date of enactment of this
Act, in trade or commerce with Cuba [ex-
cept U.S. installations In Cuba].
Certainly this is a very sweeping pro-
posal, but one which I think would put
teeth into the concern shown here to-
day by the speakers in the well of the
House who have tried to understand
why, despite the great pleas by the
United States, many of our finest friends
and allies continue to deal with Com-
munist Cuba. Certainly the bill which
has been introduced by the gentleman
from Florida [Mr. ROGERS] is one that
should be considered by the Congress
and I shall be happy to cosponsor this
resolution.
The gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
RUMSFELD] has suggested that we close
off the Panama Canal to ships that are
going to Cuba. I certainly think that
this is a worthwhile suggestion which
should be. considered very seriously by
the responsible authorities.
The gentleman from Washington [Mr.
STINSON] has suggested that we might
amend the Foreign Aid Act to bar any
foreign aid to countries which continue
to deal with Cuba. This is an excellent
idea, and I am sure one that is going to
get great consideration from the Con-
gress, although I think that a close ex-
amination will show that there are rela-
tively few countries now receiving for-
eign aid, if any, that are actually ship-
ping into Cuba. But, nevertheless, this
is a subject which I think should be con-
sidered favorably by the Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I, myself, 3 years ago,
helped organize a Cuban Freedom Com-
mittee which today is broadcasting, and
has been for several years, standard wave
band broadcasts to Cuba. I see on the
floor of the House this afternoon the gen-
tleman from Indiana [Mr. BRUCE], who
is a director of this committee. I think
our committee has been doing a great job
in bringing the truth about communism
and particularly the failure of commu-
nism to the people in Cuba, day in and
day out. We receive reports out of Cuba
that these standard wave band broad-
casts are being listened to with great in-
terest. We have purchased time from
commercial stations in Florida at Key
West. These broadcasts are being
beamed in the Spanish language to the
people in Cuba and, certainly, in my
judgment they are having a profound ef-
feet. The fact that Mr. Castro is finding
tremendous difficulties all over the island
attests to that. There is widespread
sabotage throughout Cuba. There is tre-
mendous resentment among the Cuban
people against Castro and this resent-
ment is growing. So in my opinion. we
can look forward to the day when Cuba
will be liberated from within.
However, Mr. Speaker, I think all of
these things that have been discussed
here today, in a bipartisan vein, will
serve a definite purpose. it is my opinion
that this is the road to liberating Cuba
from communism.
Mr. Speaker, it is my opinion that
when we have discussions such as we are
having here today and we can dispas-
sionately discuss the problem which we
have at hand and the various solutions
that are available to us, we will indeed
be able to find a way to liberate these
people and again bring Cuba back into
the family of free nations.
Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time
it is my intention to introduce a resolu-
tion in Congress for the establishment
of a Presidential Joint Commission for
the Liberation of Cuba.
This commission would have as its
membership representatives of the State
Department, representatives of the CIA,
representatives of the Defense Depart-
ment, and representatives of the appro-
priate committees of Congress. I think
that all the things we have been discuss-
ing here today should be considered by a
committee like this. The establishment
of such a committee, in my judgment,
would meet the test that has been men-
tioned here-of strengthening our will to
win. It would certainly serve notice on
the rest of the world that we are deter-
mined that the Communist menace must.
be removed from the Western Hemi-
sphere, certainly from Cuba.
It is my hope at the time when this
resolution is introduced it will receive
consideration by the Congress.
There is no lack of will, either by this
administration or the previous adminis-
tration or by the Congress of the United
States, to get the Communists out Of
Cuba. All Americans, whether they
are in office or out of office, whether they
belong to the Republican Party or Demo-
cratic Party, whether they serve in the
State Department or in the CIA or in
the executive branch of the Government
or legislative branch of the Govern-
ment, are agreed there must be a re-
turn of freedom to Cuba. We are all
agreed that communism must be driven
out of Cuba. Where there is disagree-
ment is in the method of getting this
accomplished, and as we listen to the de-
bates of the Organization of American
States and as we listen to the ramifica-
tions of the United Nations, we realize
no unilateral action is going to do this
job. In order to rid Cuba and the West-
ern Hemisphere of Communists, we must
have a bilateral unified action of all the
American States in this hemisphere and,
if we can, the free nations of the United
Nations.
We have a tremendous problem. In
my judgment, the establishment of a
Presidential joint commission that would
reflect the many views expressed here to-
day, the suggestions that have been made
here today, would give meaning to our
ultimate purpose. That purpose is the
liberation of Cuba in a peaceful way.
I recently asked the people of my dis-
trict for their views on,the various alter-
natives to the solution of this problem of
ridding Cuba of Communism. There
were three sets of questions submitted
for the consideration of my constituents.
The first question was: Do you favor
our continued surveillance over Cuba to
make sure there are no offensive weap-
ons down there? The answer was, of
course, "Yes."
The second question was: Do you favor
continuing economic pressures to bring
about the economic collapse of Cuba?
Here the answer was overwhelmingly
"Yes."
Finally I asked: Do you favor our con-
tinuing efforts to inspire a revolt in Cuba?
The answer was "Yes." -
The next question: Do you favor a total
naval blockade of Cuba at this time?
The answer was "No."
The second part of the question was:
Do you believe such a total naval block-
ade is an act of aggression? The an-
swer was "Yes."
The next question was: Do you think
such an act of aggression would lead to
war? The answer was indecisive. Some
thought yes and some thought no.
Finally, the last question I asked was:
Do you favor an immediate invasion of
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved Fot8Kt"AA1L0+1.1EP6.83R000200250020-3 July 29
Cuba? Here the answer was over-
whelmingly "No."
The second part of that question was:
Do you believe an invasion of Cuba at
this time would lead to nuclear war?
Here the answer was overwhelmingly
"Yes."
These answers from a representative
group of people in one district of the
United States indicate the American
people agree on most of the solutions that
have been discussed here today, economic
pressures, an amendment in foreign aid,
closing of the Panama Canal, and adopt-
ing a resolution such as the one offered
by the gentleman from Florida [Mr.
RocERs]. The response to these ques-
tions shows that the American people
have a profound and sound judgment on
these matters and agree with most Mem-
bers of this Congress who reject the con-
cept that the solution to the Cuban prob-
lem Is invasion, a unilateral Invasion of
Cuba at this time.
I agree with the sponsors of this dis-
cussion today. I think the discussions
such as we have had today, with the ex-
change of ideas that have been presented,
will result in an effective, workable
formula for liberating Cuba of Its Com-
munist rulers and bring Cuba back into
the family of other nations again.
For this reason, Mr. Speaker, I again
congratulate the sponsors, and I am
privileged to have been invited to par-
ticipate in this discussion.
Thank you very much.
Mr. WEAVER. I thank the gentle-
man from Illinois very much for his fine
statement.
Mr. STINSON. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. WEAVER. I will be glad to yield
to the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. STINSON. Mr. Speaker, I want
to thank the gentleman from Illinois for
his fine statement on all the subjects
he covered. He did mention, however,
that he had some doubts that there were
very many of the free world countries
who were actually trading with Cuba and
receiving foreign aid. I have to agree
with the gentleman that It is hard for
any Member of Congress to believe the
list of countries of the free world trading
with Cuba is as long as It Is. I would
like to ask you to refer to the record in
which I have Included a list of the free
world countries who are trading with
Communist Cuba. It includes 66 coun-
tries.
Mr. PUCINSKI. Are they presently
receiving foreign aid?
Mr. STINSON. Fifty-four of the 66
countries trading with Cuba are receiv-
ing some form of foreign aid from the
United States. It is an incredible thing,
I quite agree, and it is very difficult for us
to comprehend here in Congress.
Mr. PUCINSKI. I should be very
happy to join the gentleman in support-
ing his amendment, If it is indeed a
fact that we are giving foreign aid to
countries that in turn deal with Com-
munist Cuba, I should be very happy to
join the gentleman in offering an amend-
ment to bar supporting them with for-
eign aid.
Mr. STINSON. I wish to thank the
gentleman for his support and congrat-
ulate him once again.
Mr. HALEY. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. WEAVER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Florida.
Mr. HALEY. Personally I thank the
gentleman and also the Members of Con-
gress who have participated in this dis-
cussion here today. I think it is a
healthy thing and something we should
do. However, I want to call the atten-
tion of the Members to the fact that
Cuba of course is not just a new situation
but it has been with us for a long time.
It has been a rather remarkable thing to
me that the Cuban situation has been
allowed to continue when in a way the
answer is simple. There Is at least one
measure this Nation could have taken
and still can take I think to get rid of
Castro Cuba. As the gentleman well
knows it has been suggested that the
American Government sponsor a govern-
ment in exile. I think that is the first
step we should take in this Nation to
cure this situation. I call the attention
of the Congress to the fact that just off
of Cuba is the Isle of Pines where I un-
derstand, and I have very reliable infor-
mation In this, that there are over 100,000
political prisoners, that is, on the Isle of
Pines. Many of these prisoners over
there are trained military men. They
have nothing to lose because they are
now incarcerated there and are doing
slave work, with no hope until Castro is
destroyed. Why this country does not go
in there and supply this 100,000, or what-
ever number of military or ex-military
men are on that island, and supply them
with enough military material really to
start a revolution and take over this
island and allow this Government to rec-
ognize a government in exile there and
have a foot in the door, is something I
cannot understand. That Is so plain to
me that the stupidity of our own people
who have a responsibility here to protect
the security of our United States, in the
administration, is something I do not
understand and the governments of
South and Latin America must be con-
fused because of our lack of action.
Why they have not done it I do not
know. It seems to me that would be a
firm step and would be a step which
would bring about the downfall of the
Castro regime in Cuba and we could get
rid of that cancerous growth.
All of this talk will never get us any-
where until somebody in the administra-
tion, somebody important in the military
affairs of this country, takes the neces-
sary steps to get the necessary force to go
in there and remove this cancer.
Mr. WEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I thank
the gentleman from Florida and I shall
decline to yield any further.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
gentleman has 15 minutes remaining.
Mr. WEAVER. I shall decline to yield
any further until this next speaker has
concluded. There will be another special
order on the same subject which will
follow and there will be plenty of time
In that period.
I would like to ask unanimous consent
at this time, Mr. Speaker, that all Mem-
bers speaking here today may be allowed
to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore.
objection it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
Without
Mr. WEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I now
yield to the gentleman from New York
[Mr. HORTON).
Mr. HORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank
the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman
from Pennsylvania [Mr. WEAVER], the
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. MARSH],
the gentleman from Florida [Mr.
FUQUA], the gentleman from Florida
[Mr. GIBBONS], and others who have ar-
ranged this special order today in order
to focus the spotlight of attention on
this problem that we face in Cuba.
International communism's foothold
in the Caribbean, Castro's Cuba, con-
tinues to be a sore spot in our foreign
policy. The menace promises to per-
sist, too, unless and until the United
States assumes a more decisive role in
its removal.
So far, the major effort of the admin-
istration seems to be counting the move-
ment of Soviet men and equipment
going to and coming from the island.
There is little evidence of last October's
determination in dealing with this
threat to our security.
Any advance communism makes
should trouble us. This is why we are
participating In the defense of South
Vietnam and why our troops are sta-
tioned around the world in potentially
explosive areas. Yet, we are reluctant
to exercise a similar concern over an
area in our own backyard.
Every American knows that Cuba is
a Russian-dominated country; that the
Red Army is within 90 miles of our
coast; and that our own administration
is failing to take any action. We cannot
feel secure in our own homes, our own
localities, or our own country until
something is done to correct the situa-
tion.
if we are to remove communism from
Cuba there must be a positive restate-
ment of the Monroe Doctrine. Based
on the principle that a foreign govern-
ment shall not colonize in the Western
Hemisphere, this doctrine is fully ap-
plicable today.
Every day's delay in enunciating a
firm U.S. policy toward elimination of
the Communist grip on Cuba and taking
the steps necessary for its implementa-
tion only serves to convince the Com-
munists that we are capable of waging
only a "war of words." Khrushchev
and Castro must be told emphatically
and clearly that we mean business.
There is no alternative to action.
Whatever must be done to rid Cuba of
communism must be done.
The risks of an allout conflict rise in
proportion to our hesitancy. Instead of
quarantining the Cuban exiles we should
quarantine Cuba: rather than protecting
the shores of Cuba we should be giving
support to the exiles who are trying to
increase the pressure on Castro. In-
stead of slapping the exile in the face we
ought to be patting him on the back and
giving him our encouragement to free
Cuba.
America always has worn proudly the
mantle of leadership. It Is expected
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963
Approved For E8.sA~yff/R RqW&$c , 000200250020-3
12831
constitute, in the context of world affairs,
a special and immediate threat to the na-
tional institutions and the peace and security
of the American States, and to the right of
each state to develop its cultural, political,
and economic life freely and naturally with-
out intervention in its internal or external
affairs by other states.
from our allies. Still, recent events have very important for this country to do all
shown the administration's lack of will- it can-to isolate Cuba and prevent com-
ingness to act forthrightly in this area. merce from going into the island.
How can we in the United States pro- I thank the gentleman from Pennsyl-
claim that we will risk our cities in de- vania for his yielding, and congratulate
fense of these in -Europe when less than a all those who have helped put the spot-
hundred miles from our own shores there light on this very important problem
is a Communist regime maintained and which is taking place just a few miles
supported by the whole.Communist bloc? from our shores.
Many proposals have been advanced Mr. WEAVER. I thank the gentleman
by responsible leaders of the free world
which would embark us on the kind of
course needed to free Cuba. I petition
the administration to listen to these
views.
The focus of this Nation should
be on complete and total isolation of
Cuba. Its very insular nature makes it
almost totally dependent on outside com-
merce. This fact can be exploited.
Through established legal means the
United States can limit Cuban commerce
and bring Castro to his knees.
Psychological warfare is another
means which the United States can em-
ploy to counter Castro. Reports con-
tinue to come from Cuba of popular dis-
content with the Communist rulers. We
need to step up our efforts to nurture
that feeling through Voice of America
broadcasts and through pledging sup-
port of the Cuban people's desire for
freedom.
Positive results demand positive ac-
tion. The time for assessing the situa-
tion is long since over. Before it is too
late, before those who look to the United
States as the defender of right and jus-
tice turn away disappointed and disen-
chanted, and before communism so mer-
cilessly stifles the voice of liberation in-
side Cuba, let us put Khrushchev on
notice that unless there is a summary
withdrawal of the Soviet warmaking
machine from Cuba, this Nation will see
to its accomplishment.
Once devoid of his Soviet support,
Castro will fall of his own weight.
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. WEAVER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Illinois.
Mr. PUCINSKI. The gentleman from
New York has been speaking of the eco-
nomic pressures which might be applied
against Cuba and has emphasized that
these economic pressures could be very
effective in bringing about the downfall
of Castro's government. There are those
who say it cannot be done. But in a
similar situation, Nasser has been deny-
ing the use of the Suez Canal to the
Israelis for many, many years. We, as
a matter of fact, tried to put greater
pressure on Nasser to bar him from
doing this. Certainly if he can do it
I think we can certainly apply some eco-
nomic pressures to relieve the Cuban
situation. Will the gentleman agree?
Mr. HORTON. I believe the gentle-
man has made a good point. Certainly
Mr. Speaker, I should like now to talk
about. the Punta del Este Resolution 2
and other agreements and treaties.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PUNTA DEL ESTE
RESOLUTION 2
The problem of what to do about com-
munism in the Western Hemisphere is
ever present with Castro in Cuba. The
Monroe Doctrine has been discussed as a
legal weapon wherewith we should
proceed to act in aid of the restoration
of Cuba to democracy. However, it is
well for us to note that certain multi-
lateral treaties have established a firm
foundation for the collective action of
the nations of this hemisphere.
A. RIO TREATY OF 1947
At Rio de Janiero, September 2, 1947,
the nations of the Western Hemisphere
gathered together and signed an inter-
American treaty for reciprocal assist-
ance between the United States of Amer-
ica and the other American Republics.
Article VIII of this treaty states:
For the purposes of this treaty the
measures on which the Organ of Consulta-
tion may agree will comprise one or more
of the following: recall of chiefs of diplo-
matic missions; breaking of diplomatic re-
lations; breaking of consular relations; par-
tial or complete interruption of economic
relations or of rail, sea, air, postal, tele-
graphic, telephonic, and radiotelephonic or
radiotelegraphic communications; and use
of armed forces.
ARTICLE 6
If the inviolability or the integrity of the
territory of the sovereignty or political in-
dependence of any American State should
be affected by an aggression which is not
an armed attack or by an extracontinental
or intracontinental conflict, or by any other
fact or situation that might endanger the
peace of America, the Organ of Consultation
shall meet immediately in order to agree
on the measures which must be taken in case
of aggression to assist the victim of the ag-
gression of, in any case, the measures which
should be taken for the common defense and
for the maintenance of the peace and se-
curity of the continent. at Punta del Este, Uruguay, January 22-
You might summarize the Rio Treaty 31, 1962. Here a final act was adopted
as providing for collective self-defense which provided specifically another step
for all nations of the Western Hemi- toward the idea of collective self-defense
sphere. which was originally set forth in the
B. CARACAS DECLARATION OF 1964 Rio Treaty. Punta del Este recognized
The 10th Inter-American Conference fully the meaning and the threat to the
of March 28, 1954, at Caracas, Venezuela, Americas of international communism.
put forth a declaration of solidarity Resolution 2 spelled out what actions
against international Communist inter- could be taken by member states. I
vention: quote this resolution agreed to at the
this has not brought about a nuclear The Fourth Meeting of Consultation of
war in the Middle East, but all sorts of Ministers of Foreign Affairs recognized that,
pressures have been brought by the free in addition to adequate internal measures
world to free up the Suez Canal. I think in each state, a high degree of international
this is a good point the gentleman has ger which cooperation is the required subversive to eradicate whiactivities iti of the inter-
made, especially when he talks about national communism pose for the American
blocking commerce to Cuba. I am sure States.
the gentleman will agree with me as my The aggressive character of the interna-
other colleagues have agreed that it is tional Communist movement continues to
According to the declaration:
The domination or control of the political
institutions of any American State by the
international Communist movement, extend-
ing to this hemisphere the political system
of an extracontinental power, would consti-
tute a threat to the sovereignty and political
independence of the American. States, endan-
gering the peace of America, and would call
for a meeting of consultation to consider
the adoption of appropriate action in accord-
ance with existing treaties.
The declaration says further:
That, without prejudice to such other
measures as they may consider desirable,
special attention be given by each of the
American governments to the following steps
for the purpose of counteracting the sub-
versive activities of the international Com-
munist movement within their respective
jurisdictions:
1. Measures to require disclosure of the
identity, activities, and sources of funds of
those who are spreading propaganda of the
international Communist movement or who
travel in the interests of that movement, and
of those who act as its agents or in its be-
half; and
2. The exchange of information among
governments to assist in fulfilling the pur-
pose of the resolutions adopted by the Inter-
American Conferences and Meetings of Min-
isters of Foreign Affairs regarding interna-
tional communism.
Thus to supplement the Rio Treaty
for collective self-defense, the Caracas
Declaration recognized the aggressive
character of international communism
and is a pledge of solidarity against
Communist intervention.
C. ACT OF BOGOTA, 1960
Since President Eisenhower's state-
ment of July 11, 1960, foreshadowing the
Act of Bogota of the Alliance for Prog-
ress, the United States has-moved to dis-
associate itself from the extreme con-
servatives at the top of the Latin Amer-
ican oligarchy. With this the confidence
of the other democracies of the Western
Hemisphere was gained.
D. RESOLUTION 2 OF PUNTA DEL ESTE CONFER-
ENCE, JANUARY 1962
The Eighth Meeting of Consultation of
Ministers of Foreign Affairs was held
Conference and endorsed by the
administration.
The Council of the Organization of Ameri-
can States, meeting as the provisional organ
of consultation, resolves: .
To urge the member states to take those
steps that they may consider appropriate for
their individual or collective self-defense,
and to cooperate, as may be necessary or de-
sirable, to strengthen their capacity to coun-
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 12832 Approved FoU8f4/ _Jffl8JW3R000200250020-3 July _29
teract threats or acts of aggression, subver-
sion, or other dangers to peace and security
resulting from the continued intervention in
this hemisphere of Sino-Soviet powers, in
accordance with the obligations established
in treaties and agreements such as the Char-
ter of the Organization of American States
and the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal
Assistance.
To recommend that the member states in
accordance with articles 6 and 8 of the Inter-
American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance,
take all measures, individually and collec-
tively including the use of Armed Force,
which they may deem necessary to insure
that the Government of Cuba cannot con-
tinue to receive from the Sino-Soviet powers
military material and related supplies which
may threaten the peace and security of the
continent and to prevent the missiles to
Cuba with offensive capability from ever
becoming an active threat to the peace and
security of the Continent.
Latin Americans who first tended to
view the Castro Cuban situation as pri-
marily a bilateral problem of the United
States and Cuba now consider this a
multilateral problem for the whole hemi-
sphere. Thus the implementation of
multilateral action through the Punta
del Este Resolution 2 and the Monroe
Doctrine could add to the strength and
forcefulness of a new United States posi-
tion in the eyes of Latin America.
By cooperative leadership we can work
with other hemispheric countries along
the two parallel lines of peaceful demo-
cratic and political resolution. These
measures of economic development and
social reform are envisioned by the
Alliance for Progress. Political and, if
need be, paramilitary, antiguerrilla
measures also can be taken to protect
this revolution from the scavengers of
Havana.
For too long the United States has
not been able to carry the message to the
Latin American nations that this coun-
try believes In the principles of non-
intervention and self-determination.
This means Americans recognize the
right of peoples to organize their way
of life freely in political, economic, and
cultural spheres and to express their
will through free elections without for-
eign interference,
By uniting together we can then mu-
tually urge, as member states, to take
those steps that are considered appro-
priate for individual or collective self-
defense and to cooperate to strengthen
the capacity to counteract threats or
acts of aggression, subversion or other
dangers to the peace and security.
These factors arise from the continued
intervention in this hemisphere of Sino-
Soviet powers. This cooperation must
be in accordance with the obligations
established in treaties, agreements such
as the Charter of the OAS-Organiza-
tion of American States-and the Inter-
American Treaty of Reciprocal Assist-
ance. The organization of a Latin
American Treaty Organization could
function similarly to NATO. Thus a
LATO could be the mutual task force
of action when it is deemed necessary.
There are those who would say that
the Cubans asked for the Sino-Soviets
to come to their island to protect them
from invasion. But at this point in our
history Cuba stands not only as a Com-
munist satellite, but completely depend-
ent upon the graces of the Sino-Soviet
alliance, shaky as it may be. Continued
occupation of this island implies nothing
more than Russian imperialism imposed
upon the Western Hemisphere. The col-
lective action of the United States with
its allied Western Hemisphere nations,
putting into effect the Pufite del Este
Resolution 2, can then work together
to overthrow the Castro regime through
peaceful efforts.
There is no question about the inter-
vention of the Soviets in Cuba. There Is
no question that the United States wishes
to give the Cubans an opportunity to ex-
press their self-determination and na-
tional sovereignty free of this foreign
yoke.
We who stand here today on the floor
of Congress speak out In many individual
ways, but with a collective tone. We
Members of Congress want Cuba free
from Soviet interference. We want the
Cubans to have the basic inherent rights
of choosing their own future through
democratic processes.
CUBA AND THE COLD WAR
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
LrgoNATr1. Under previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Virginia [Mr.
MARSH) Is recognized for 2 hours.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, at this
time I would like to recognize the gentle-
man from Illinois [Mr. MCCLORYI.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Speaker, today I
am privileged to join my other colleagues
in the House to discuss the problem
created by Castro's Communist Cuba. I
think what all of us are searching for in.
calling attention of the administration
to the need for action, is that we find
there Is no discernible program of action.
providing hope for a solution of the
Communist problem In Cuba.
Mr. Speaker, we have witnessed the
catastrophe at the Bay of Pigs. Up to
that time we were led to believe that we
would provide support for Cubans in exile
who undertook the military Invasion of
their homeland. Yet, at the crucial mo-
ment, we found that such a program did
not exist or was changed and the sup-
port was withdrawn.
Again, when the official announcement
was made of the presence of nuclear mis-
siles on the island of Cuba, we were
convinced that a positive program ex-
isted, first, to rid the island of Cuba of
these nuclear missiles; and, second, to
assure the people of this country and of
the free world that physical inspection of
the island would assure us that the mis-
siles were removed. But, the physical in-
spection of the missile bases on the is-
land of Cuba never took place. In-
stead-and I do not suggest that this was
part of any agreement or understand-
ing-we discontinued our missile bases
that we had maintained up to that time
In Turkey and In Italy.
Mr. Speaker, we know that certain
steps have been taken with regard to
Cuban shipping. But we know too that
shipping is taking place through the
ships of free nations who are entering
Cuban ports and supplying Castro and
the Communists with much-needed ci-
vilian goods-as well as other goods for
all we know.
Mr. Speaker, we thought that if the
exiles organized and launched attacks
on or against Cuban shipping that these
would be supported. But instead this
was frowned upon and action taken to
prevent it.
Mr. Speaker, we were distressed when
we found that the U.N. through the fi-
nancial facilities at its disposal, was
providing economic aid for an agricul-
tural experiment project in Cuba, with
very little done on our part to prevent it.
During all these episodes and these
events we have been dismayed that there
appears no positive and aggressive pro-
gram to rid the island of Cuba of
Castro's communism.
So we are searching here today for
something beyond passive attitudes, and
we are seeking more satisfactory an-
swers as far as our American constitu-
ency Is concerned.
Mr. Speaker, we must adhere to the
proven efficacy of the Monroe Doctrine.
We know without its enforcement, with-
out limiting the Western Hemisphere to
free countries and preventing the en-
croachment of hostile foreign nations
that our entire national safety and se-
curity are jeopardized.
So in the interest of our national se-
curlty and our national safety, and to
encourage the development of a program
behind which we can all lend our support
and which will have the wholehearted
support of the American people, we speak
out and speak forth. United, from both
sides of the aisle, we urge and implore
that such a program be developed and
that appropriate and necessary action
to carry it out shall take place.
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. MARSH. I yield to the gentleman
from Illinois.
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, my dis-
tinguished colleague from Illinois has,
of course, reviewed the past. I have
previously congratulated the sponsors of
this program for arranging today's dis-
cussion to see whether or not we may
look forward to discussing concerte plans
that might throw some light and hope
on the day when Cuba will be liberated
from Its Communist rulers. So long as
my distinguished and pleasant colleague
from Illinois, just north of me, wants to
go back into the closets, I suggest that
we do not stop with the Bay of Pigs in-
vasion, serious as it may have been.
Perhaps you should go back a little fur-
ther. The gentleman very conveniently
ignores the fact that Mr. Castro came to
power on New Year's Day, 1959, when
the previous administration was in
power, the previous administration that
had brought Mr. Castro to the city of
Washington. We all remember the very
fine reception given that young man in
this city. He was wined and dined and
we heard speeches in the Statler Hotel.
Certainly Mr. Castro was brought here
by an administration other than this
one.
The present administration, when the
time came, when It became apparent
that Mr. Castro constituted a clear and
overt threat to the security of the United
States and the Western Hemisphere,
when we uncovered the missile launching
platforms in Cuba, this administration,
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963
Approved For FteftnM8MA .' J&BRT)6 BM 000200250020-3 12833
as President Kennedy so magnificently
stated last Friday, did not hesitate to
serve notice on the Soviet Union and Mr.
Castro that if those offensive weapons
were not removed forthwith we would
shower the island of Cuba with full re-
taliation. Nobody can find any wishy-
washy attitude of the President, Mr.
Kennedy, when he was in command of
the situation in October of 1962.
We have heard a great deal about the
Bay of Pigs invasion, clearly ignoring
the fact the Bay of Pigs was organized
by the previous administration under the
then Director of the CIA appointed. by a
previous administration. Our young
President came into office in January
1961 and 2 months later he was faced
with the decision of starting war over
Cuba. His caution is understandable.
But after he had established himself,
when he had full control of the situa-
tion, Mr. Kennedy did not hesitate in
October 1962, to say we are ready to
stand up in the defense of freedom, even
at the cost of a nuclear holocaust. He
certainly spoke candidly to Mr. Castro
and Mr. Khrushchev and the Commu-
nists and they had to retreat.
So, as long as we are going to have a
record, let us have a complete record. It
is my hope there will be more of these
special orders on a bipartisan basis and
with a bipartisan approach, where we
are going to be able to discuss, as we
have discussed today, concrete forward-
moving proposals that are not going to'
lament the past but, rather, give us all
hope that the future can bring an as-
surance that communism will be eradi-
cated from the Western Hemisphere.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. MARSH. I yield to the gentle-
man from Illinois.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Speaker, I want
to commend the bipartisan approach to
this subject. I assume that the reason
we have Members from both sides of the
aisle speaking up today is because we
want to give support to a bipartisan pro-
gram. I do not want to suggest that
there were no errors committed before
the Bay of Pigs. Nevertheless, I think
there is a general dissatisfaction with
respect to that and the other events af-
fecting our Cuban policy which I enu-
merated. There is a desire today for
something more positive; a program di-
rected toward Castro's Cuba to which
Republicans and Democrats alike can
turn to find an answer and can support.
I know that is what the American people
want. In reviewing some of these blun-
ders and these incidents it is quite.clear
that the administration's action did not
reflect such a policy. Recognizing the
need for a forward looking program and
a positive program, I think it is neces-.
sary to review to some extent events that
have occurred during the time this ad-
ministration has been in office. I sup-
port the Members on both sides of the
aisle who are today looking for an an-
swer and who, I assume, are commend-
ing to the executive and administration,
which has charge of our foreign affairs,
a positive and identifiable program be-
hind which we can rally. Quite ob-
viously that program does not exist or
else. we would not be speaking up as we
are here today. It is the lack of that
program and the need for it which we
feel. It is such a program which we
want to encourage, and which we are
confident can benefit the entire free
world.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I now
yield to the gentleman from Florida
[Mr. CRAMER].
Mr. CRAMER. I thank the gentle-
man from Virginia for yielding. I too
am delighted to see this discussion with
regard to the problem which Cuba pre-
sents, particularly as it relates to sub-
version in the hemisphere. The findings
of all the committees that have looked
into it, the Selden subcommittee, the
Stennis subcommittee, and others,, are
unequivocally of the opinion that the
island of Cuba is being used intention-
ally and purposely in a planned manner
by the international Communist con-
spiracy for the purpose of subverting
not only Cuba, which has already been
accomplished, but other nations in this
hemisphere. That program too is well
on its way to accomplishment in a num-
ber of areas and if time permitted we
could discuss the extent of the growth of
the Communist Party in Puerto Rico,
the extent of the growth of the Com-
munist Party in the Dominican Repub-
lic, the happenings in Haiti with regard
to Communists having a foothold there;
we could discuss the Grand Cayman sit-
uation which arose just the other day
where Great Britain is permitting Cuban
planes to land and take off, and I under-
stand now they have shifted their ac-
tivity from Grand Cayman to Little
Cayman, just a little bit to the north,
because protests were received about
that. We could talk about British
Guiana and what Cheddi Jagan is doing
there with regard to the encouragement
of Communism and Communist activity;
we could talk about Venezuela and the
extent to which uprisings are occurring
there, and the fact that humiliations
never before known to. any nation, par-
ticularly not known to the United
States, have. been caused by raids of
Communists on the United States mili-
tary installations there with instances
of U.S. officers even being required to
remove some of their clothing. All- of
this is being done at the instigation of
the Communist movement which has as
its base and foundation the activities
running from Moscow through Cuba. I
repeat, from Moscow, where the inter-
national Communist conspiracy has its
fountainhead, through Cuba.
We could talk about Brazil and the
fact that in the cabinet presently of
the Brazilian Government are a number
of known Communists; we could dis-
cuss the Communist subversion and the
extent of it in Latin America without
any fear of contradiction, and go on
ad infinitum.
Now what is being done about it? We
have heard a lot today about general
recommendations made by a number of
Members and many of them are ex-
tremely sound and most of them have
been made before, but the important
thing is practically all of them are being
ignored.
The concern of many of us has been
the fact that there is no policy relating
to getting rid of Castro and communism
in Cuba at the present time. Certainly
there is none that could accomplish the
objective. Why, we saw just the other
day the situation where seven or eight
of the Organization of American States
nations refused to follow our leadership
in trying to find ways to cut off economic
assistance and to cut off travel of sub-
versive trainees to Cuba from Latin
American nations because seven or eight
of those Organization of American States
nations refused to join us in that effort.
Why . are we not making any real
headway? Where are all these gains
that are being claimed for freedom in
this hemisphere by this administration?
Why are not the Alliance for Progress
funds being used for the purpose of ac-
complishing freedom in this hemisphere
through other nations in this hemi-
sphere? Why are not Alliance for Prog-
ress funds being withheld from the five
Latin American nations that still rec-
ognize Cuba? Some of these nations
still do business with Castro, and I am
talking principally now about Mexico, al-
though there are others that still do busi-
ness with Castro, and I am talking prin-
cipally now about Mexico, although there
are others that still do business with
Cuba and still get our Alliance for
Progress funds. If you want something
concrete, why does not the administra-
tion withhold Alliance for Progress funds
or use it as a lever at least to require
these nations to withdraw recognition
and support of Cuba or stop. doing busi-
r ,s with Castro in Cuba?
No, this, is not being programed. And
as a matter of fact the administration
has announced that it does not have the
intention of doing so, as they said in a
letter to me: in discussing that matter.
Mr. Speaker, let me ask you this ques-
tion: What is happening now with
regard to the military buildup in Cuba?
Yes, we had the blockade. And I say this
to my friend from Illinois. What hap-
pened after the blockade? Why did we
let our guard down? Why did we not in-
sist on doing those things that would
have given us -unequivocal assurance
that missiles were out of Cuba, offen-
sive missiles and other offensive weap-
ons? And one of which is on-site inspec-
tion. Anyone can refer to the report of
the Selden subcommittee, as?well as the
hearings of that subcommittee, as well
as the Stennis committee, and he will
come to the unequivocal conclusion that
the only way we can be assured missiles
have been withdrawn is by an on-site
inspection. Even today-evidence is
very substantial that a number of mis-
siles were hidden in the caves or at least
the caves are there and substantial ac-
tivity is going on. But we have no ab-
solute proof that all missiles were
actually removed from Cuba. That is
what those reports and hearings in-
dicate. And the only way it could be
proved would be by on-site inspection,
according to the Stennis report.
Now, what happened? Why did we
drop our guard? We had the Com-
munists on the run. We could have had
on-site inspections. Why did we not
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved Fqr * gMf fg'#/OIUBpP6 Qff3R000200250020-3 Jithi 29
less we want failure. And Castro at
that very time, on October 28, had the
intestinal fortitude to make five de-
mands on the free world, the United
States In particular, even while the
quarantine was in effect: and we have
given in on two of them already, his de-
mands that the United States stop all
commando raids and arms drops from
our shores and secondly from Puerto
Rico.
Mr. PUCINSKI. All of them were
rejected.
There is one point the gentleman
makes. The gentleman has made this
statement before, and I have listened to
it with great interest, about this on-site
inspection. I am for on-site inspection
and I am sure everyone else is. But the
gentleman has never come right out and
said, "If we cannot get on-site inspec-
tion. let us invade Cuba." Why does he
not make that statement if that is what
he wants?
Mr. CRAMER. I have listened to this
for a long time. The gentleman is
preaching a war-scare, do-nothing ap-
proach. If we are to do nothing because
of a war scare than we woul do noth-
ing-period. You have contsantly pro-
tested against anybody making con-
crete recomendations about what should
be done about Cuba, on the basis that
if anybody really wants to do anything
about Cuba now, they are calling for an
invasion. That is about as asinine a
position as could be taken, and the pur-
pose is to poison the well. Too many in
high places today are preaching this
war-scare psychosis as an excuse for In-
action. Anything being said by anybody
but the administration is interpreted by
the administration, and the President,
as a call for war. Do the critics of this
administration's Cuban policy want to
go to war? Of course not. But they do
want action now which is the best deter-
rent against a full-scale war later.
Nobody wants to go to war. You are
rendering a disservice to this great
Nation when you suggest, In downgrad-
ing proposals made, that anybody on
this floor, myself included, wants war.
It is not necessary that we go to war
with regard to Cuba. There are many
steps that can be and should be taken
that are far short of war. Until we
take those steps, nobody knows what the
ultimate steps must be to get rid of
communism. But if military action is
the only way to get rid of Castro after
all other steps are taken, and the evi-
dence convinces most people who have
looked Into this matter that this mili-
tary buildup and subversive activity is
continuing at a very substantial rate,
if It is essential in invoking the Monroe
Doctrine and that means kicking the
Communists out of Cuba to preserve our
security, that is the step we are going
to have to take. But I say there are
many other steps, some of which have
been proposed, that we could and should
take, all short of war and I will develop
the rest of them in a moment.
We could invoke a complete trade ban,
not one with loopholes as the present
one has, but one that would cut off all
trade between this country and other
free nations with Cuba. Our foreign-
aid bill was amended and passed to ac-
complish this. The mandate was writ-
ten into the law passed last year by
the Congress of the United States, Public
Law 87-872. The mandate was written
in there, and I am sure the House is
familiar with it. It is a mandate re-
lating to strategic materials and spe-
cifically refers to petroleum, denying
foreign aid to any nation shipping such
materials to Cuba. I listed earlier in
the discussion nations that are shipping
petroleum to Cuba in direct violation of
that mandate. If. the administration
really wants to do something, the least it
could do would be to uphold and carry
out the laws of the United States as en-
acted by the Congress of the United
States, and not spend money in contra-
vention of this mandate which was in the
appropriation bill on foreign aid.
The second provision in Public Law
87-872 requires no aid to any country
that is carrying on any trade with Cuba
unless the President advises the com-
mittees of Congress his reason for per-
mitting such aid despite such trade.
No such advice has come to Congress-
and aid Is still going to countries doing
business with Castro-again in direct
violation of the law.
Now we should recognize, as has been
said before, and by myself for many
months, a government in exile. As a
matter of fact, during the campaign I
remember well the President's reference
a number of times to the need for a gov-
ernment in exile and suggested that was
one of the solutions to the problem.
We should have adequate patrols to
prevent arms drops in the Caribbean.
We do not presently have adequate pa-
trols. Arms drops are presently taking
place and have been taking place for
some time.
What are we going to do about it? We
have not beefed up our military suffi-
ciently to provide adequate surveillance.
Everybody knows that.
What are we doing to prevent travel
to Cuba for subversive training-even
from the United States? You see these
are the things that are bothering the
American people. Why are U.S. citizens
even being permitted to still go to Cuba?
Ninety-seven of them last year, in 6
months. Why are they permitted to go?
And only one so far has been prosecuted,
Mary Levi Travis?
Why are 58 American students pres-
ently In Cuba extolling the virtues of the
Cuban revolution erroneously? Why
were they permitted to go? Why? And
as I stated on the floor, so far the State
Department has announced that their
only Intention is to withdraw their pass-
ports and not prosecute the leaders who
perpetrated this thing?
What is being done with regard to the
other Latin American countries in cut-
ting off this travel and subversive train-
ing from these other Latin American na-
tions?
When are we going to announce with-
out equivocation our intention to take
the steps necessary to rid this hemi-
sphere of communism? Some of them I
have mentioned. Some of them have
been mentioned on the floor. One was
a restatement and full implementation
of the Monroe Doctrine.
insist upon on-site inspections so that
the security of this hemisphere would
have been assured? Today it is a ques-
tion mark. What is going on in this
island?
My distinguished friend from Florida
[Mr. HALEY] mentioned the Isle of Pines
today. Reports are coming out of Cuba
from some of the refugees who came
across in these ships, some of those who
were prisoners on the Isle of Pines, that
there is a tremendous Communist activ-
ity and buildup there. They say that
the Isle of Pines is the transshipment
point for arms drops to Latin America.
and that the Russians are now asking
that the Isle of Pines be turned over for
use exclusively by the Russians for such
arms buildups and as an available depot
for arms drops to other Latin American
countries.
Reports are persistent from the islands
on the north shores of Cuba that there
is constant military buildup in a secre-
tive manner, with not even the Cubans
being permitted to be on the islands to
see what is going on. How, then, can
we be assured of what Is going on In
Cuba?
Air surveillance? What is happening
with regard to air surveillance? In re-
cent months low-level flights have been
discontinued. I repeat, in recent months
low-level flights have been complete-
ly discontinued. Higher surveillance
flights have been curtailed substantially.
So how do we know what is going on in
Cuba? But more important, what steps
are we taking to make certain of what
is going on in Cuba, looking to the secu-
rity of this hemisphere, that it be ade-
quately protected? I say not enough.
I say we should reinstate low-level sur-
veillance flights so that we will know
what is going on with regard to our
security as it relates to Cuba. We should
also insist on on-site Inspections and let
Castro defend his refusal to permit this
proof of nonaggression Intent to the
world.
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield
Mr. CRAMER. If the gentleman from
Virginia will permit me to yield to the
gentleman from Illinois, I should be glad
to yield.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, there are
several people who are scheduled to take
time, but because of the questions that
have been raised by the gentleman from
Florida, I yield to the gentleman from
Illinois [Mr. PuciNsKll for 2 minutes.
Mr. PUCINSKI. The gentleman from
Florida asked me if I might venture a
guess as to what happened to on-site
inspections. The gentleman recalls
that negotiations were held and Mr.
Castro just flatly refused. Is the gen-
tleman suggesting that we ought to send
in the marines and establish an on-site
inspection beachhead? Is that the
answer?
If the gentleman wants to send troops
in there, let him say so. Why does he
not say so?
Mr. CRAMER. The answer is that we
should have kept up the Cuban block-
ade until we got on-site inspection. But
instead of that, we withdrew it. We
cannot let Castro dictate our policies un-
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 12835
I would like to ask unanimous consent
to place in the RECORD at this point my
resolution on this subject, House Joint
Resolution 227, which was introduced
on February 4 of this year, and which
does what the Congress refused to do last
year on the floor of this House when the
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. BROOM-
FIELD] by amendment brought this up.
My resolution clearly restates the Mon-
roe Doctrine and calls for its full
implementation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
LIBONATI). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
There was no objection.
The resolution referred to is as follows:
H.J. RES. 227
Joint resolution expressing the determina-
tion of the United States with respect to
the situation in Cuba, to restate and im-
plement the Monroe Doctrine, and to
encourage adherence to the principles of
self-determination and human freedom
Whereas President James Monroe, an-
nouncing the Monroe Doctrine in 1823,
declared that the United States would con-
sider any attempt on the part of European
powers "to extend their system to any portion
of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace
and safety"; and
Whereas in the Rio Treaty of 1947 the
parties agreed that "an armed attack by any
State against an American State shall be
considered as an attack against all the Amer-
ican States, and, consequently, each one of
the said contracting parties undertakes to
assist in meeting the attack in the exercise
of the inherent right of individual or col-
lective self-defense recognized by article 51
of the Charter of the United Nations"; and
Whereas the Foreign Ministers of the Orga-
nization of American States at Punts del Este
in January 1962 declared: "The present Gov-
ernment of Cuba has identified itself with
the principles of Marxist-Leninist ideology,
has established a political, economic, and
social system based on that doctrine, and
accepts military assistance from extracon-
tinental Communist powers, including even
the threat of military intervention in Amer-
ica on the part of the Soviet Union"; and
Whereas the international Communist
movement has increasingly extended into
Cuba its political, economic, and military
sphere of influence, despite the fact that
such action is clearly in violation of the
Monroe Doctrine and the principles of self-
determination and human freedom; and
Whereas due to the continuing inaction
and indecision of the United States Govern-
ment and the following offensive weapon
"quarantine" of Cuba in October 1962, and
commenting on the negotiations entered into
between Khrushchev and the United States,
mostly secret in nature, including the aban-
donment of on-site inspection of offensive
weapons in Cuba, Khrushchev has enunci-
ated and is implementing the "Khrushchev
doctrine" as a replacement for the Monroe
Doctrine as he restated the Communist aims
in the Western Hemisphere at the recent
Supreme Soviet when he stated: "Socialist
Cuba exists. Cuba remains a beacon of
Marxist-Leninist Ideas in the Western Hemi-
sphere. The impact of her revolutionary
example will grow. The Government of the
United States has given a pledge not to in-
vade Cuba."; and
Whereas Castro, on January 16, 1963, an-
.ounced his intention to use his externally
supported massive military power to con-
tinue the enslavement of the Cuban people
and to "bring the masses to battle" through
revolution in Latin America; and
Whereas if the Monroe Doctrine is to be
preserved it must be restated and fully en-
forced at this critical period when commu-
nism is openly and notoriously arming
Cuba with massive modern weapons, tens of
thousands of Russian troops, technicians
and advisers, electronic missile jamming and
tracking devices and "fishing" ports capable
of accommodating Russian missiles, all of
which constitutes a military capability of
such proportions that it is offensive in nature
and design: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That the
United States is determined-
(a) to prevent by whatever means may be
necessary, including the use of arms, the
international Communist movement oper-
ating through the Marxist-Leninist regime in
Cuba from enslaving the people of Cuba
and threatening the security of the Western
Hemisphere, and from extending, by force
or the threat of force, its aggressive or sub-
versive activities to any part .of this hemi-
sphere;
(b) to prevent in Cuba the creation or use
of an externally supported military capability
enslaving the freedom-loving people of Cuba
and endangering the security of the United
States; and
(c) to work with the Organization of
American States and with freedom-loving
Cubans to support the aspirations of the
Cuban people for self-determination.
SEC. 2. That the Congress of the United
States urges the President, in accordance
with existing law, to take, and supports him
in taking, jointly with other free nations or
unilaterally, such political, diplomatic, eco-
nomic, or military action as may be necessary
to implement and enforce the Monroe Doc-
trine throughout this hemisphere and to
continue to encourage adherence to the
principles of self-determination and human
freedom.
Mr. CRAMER. I also would like to
place in the RECORD a resolution by the
gentleman from Montana and a similar
resolution submitted with regard to a
restatement of the Monroe Doctrine,
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
The resolution and restatement re-
ferred to are as follows:
H.J. RES. 498
Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America
in Congress assembled-
(a) That the United States regards the
Monroe Doctrine as continuing to be funda-
mental to its foreign policies;
(b) That the United States regards the
existence of a military base in Cuba sup-
ported by Soviet equipment and Soviet per-
sonnel as a clear violation of the Monroe
Doctrine;
(c) That the objective of the policy of the
United States with relation to Cuba must
be-
1. Termination of Soviet intervention;
2. Establishment of conditions under
which the Cuban people may freely exercise
their right to self-determination;
3. An end to Communist subversion, sabo-
tage, and guerrilla warfare against the people
of the Western Hemisphere.
RESTATEMENT AND FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF
MONROE DOCTRINE RELATING TO CUBA AND
COMMUNIST SUBVERSION CALLED FOR
Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker,.I. am happy to
join with the gentleman from Montana [Mr.
BATTINI, chairman of the Republican Task
Force on Cuba and Communist Subversion in
the Western Hemisphere, having the privilege
myself of being vice chairman of this task
force, in calling for the restatement and full
implementation of the Monroe Doctrine.
The Republican policy committee and the
Republican National Committee have re-
cently endorsed this position.
I am particularly encouraged that this
position, as reaffirmed by the resolution in-
troduced by the gentleman from Montana,
is firmly announced by the Republican
Party, having introduced a similar resolu-
tion, House Joint Resolution 227 on Feb-
ruary 4, 1963. It is becoming more and
more obvious that the New Frontier is seek-
ing "accommodations" with the Communists
throughout the world as well as in this
hemisphere.
The aim of today's resolution and House
Joint Resolution 227 is the implementing
of such political, diplomatic, economic or
military action as may be necessary to en-
force the Monroe Doctrine throughout this
hemisphere.
The failure of the President to take any
firm and meaningful action with regard
to the Communist threat in Cuba and
throughout this hemisphere makes it incum-
bent upon the Congress to express its posi-
tion in a resolution of this nature.
I do not believe the American people or
the Congress can long condone the New
Frontier apathy that exists toward this very
real threat to the peace and security of all
the Americas-which is leading the United
States toward a coexistence accommodation
with Communists.
The President has recently called for a
"reexamination of our attitude toward the
Soviet Union." Our reexamination should
be one looking toward a tougher policy.
In light of the recent reports by the Orga-
nization of American States, the Stennis
committee and Selden subcommittee reports,
pointing to Communist infiltration and sub-
version in this hemisphere, a reaffirmation
and implementation of the Monroe Doctrine
would be an obvious necessary start toward
a tougher, more realistic policy toward So-
viet influence in this hemisphere.
I am gravely and deeply concerned about
the signs that point toward seeking an "ac-
commodation," an expression used by the
President at his. American University com-
mencement address this year in redefining
the New Frontier foreign policies in calling
also for a reexamination of our attitude to-
ward the Soviet Union-in Cuba and else-
where.
I am concerned when we open up com-
mercial air corridors to nonscheduled air-
lines owned and operated by Castro's Com-
munist government over the United States
as was done a few weeks ago by a regulation
of the FAA-so long as these planes going
to and from Canada, trading with Canada
which is a country for transshipment from
many of the Iron Curtain countries, stop In
one of our major cities for inspection-one
of. which is Dulles Airport outside Washing-
ton, D.C. Thus, Castro's planes can be flying
over and landing within a few miles of the
National's Capital. Apparently the quid pro
quo for this "accommodation" is that Cuba
will now guarantee safety of U.S. commercial
airplanes over Cuba and the FAA has issued
an order permitting such flights.
Perhaps this is why the New Frontier is so
unconcerned about Russian trawlers violat-
ing our territorial waters.
Perhaps this is why little is being done to
discourage other free nations from trading
with Cuba-a practice that is ever increasing
in recent weeks. I cite as justification for
this Monroe Doctrine resolution introduced
today and House Joint Resolution 227 the
second interim report of the Subcommittee
on Special Projects pn Cuba and Subversion
in the Western Hemisphere.
SECOND INTERIM REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMIT-
TEE ON CUBA AND SUBVERSION IN THE WEST-
ERN HEMISPHERE-A TASK FORCE OF THE
REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE, SUBCOM-
MITTEE ON SPECIAL PROJECTS
PREAMBLE
Within the past week the President of the
United States has made a foreign policy ad-
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
12836 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
dress calling for a reexamination of the atti-
tude of Americans toward the Soviet Union.
The theme of this address was that the Soviet
Union could be led to adopt a more enlight-
ened attitude if the United States changed
its attitude toward peace and put aside its
belief that the Russian people are lacking
in virtue.
It must be presumed that the purpose of
the President in making his remarks of June
10 was to indicate the direction of American
foreign policy. We believe that the President
is completely wrong In believing that the
attitude of the American public toward the
Soviet Union Is a major cause of the Nation's
conflict with communism and that Khru-
shchev's heart can be melted if this Nation
adopts a more cordial attitude toward him.
It seems to us tragically irrelevant for the
President to urge upon the Nation a deeper
admiration of the Soviet Union for such at-
tributes as courage and industry at a time
when the ink Is hardly dry on an OAS report
declaring "intervention by Sino-Soviet pow-
ers in this hemisphere, by way of Cuba, has
increased considerably during the past year."
The report which follows Is offered In the
hope that it will direct attention back to the
type of basic decision that must be made by
the leaders of this Nation in order to Win the
cold war.
SECOND INTERIM REPORT
The Nation needs a Cuban policy. It has
no Cuban policy primarily because the Pres-
ident and the Democratic Congress have
failed to make up their minds about the
Nation's goal.
To a President who 18 fond of nautical
metaphors, we say that a course cannot be
charted until the port which we want to
reach has been determined. Until the des-
tination has been firmly fixed, the Nation
will continue to drift.
The statements so far issued by adminis-
tration leaders to define the goal of Cuban
policy have been ambiguous, inconsistent,
and incomplete. The joint congressional
resolution signed by the President on Octo-
ber 3, 1962-perhaps the most authoritative
statement of the national policy goal-is
deficient in clarity. In comprehensiveness,
and in courage.
Consequently, the Congress should adopt,
and the President should sign, a new joint
resolution stating the goal of the policy of
the United States toward Communist Cuba.
THE AMBIGUITY OF THE GOAL OF CUBAN POLICY
The joint congressional resolution, like
the President's statements of September 4
and 13, 1962. expresses opposition to the es-
tablishment in Cuba of an offensive military
capability which threatens the security of
the United States or of other nations in the
hemisphere. It expresses opposition to the
export of communism to other Latin Ameri-
can nations by force or the threat of force.
It Is silent, however, on the attitude of the
United States toward a Soviet military pres-
ence in Cuba which is defensive in character
or which does not immediately threaten the
security of the United States or of other
American nations. It Is silent on the atti-
tude of the United States toward Commu-
nist subversion carried on by means other
than the use or threat of force.
Many of the statements that relate to our
Nation's goals are open to the Interpretation
that this Nation is ready to coexist with a
Communist Cuba If It or Cuba does not seek
to impose communism on other nations.'
They suggest that a Soviet presence in Cuba
' The uncertainty about the Nation's objec-
tives is evidenced in a recent report from
Freedam House entitled "What Can We Do
About Cuba?" The report, stating the con-
sensus of the deliberations of 25 experts on
Cuba In late April 1963, declares that the
following are troubling questions: "Is Amer-
ican Cuban policy geared to a fiegotiated
accord with Khrushchev on the kind of Cuba
which does not Involve offensive weapons,
though abnormal, is something which our
Nation can live with.
Confusion about the objective of our na-
tional policy Is reflected in the utterance of
the President as well as In those of lesser
lenders of the administration. The President
has refrained from reaffirming or repudiating
the Monroe Doctrine but has offered a trun-
cated version of the doctrine, which one ad-
ministration lieutenant called the Kennedy
doctrine.' The President spoke boldly be-
fore the released Cuban prisoners about the
return of their flag to a free Havana in Miami
In December 1962. But, less than 3 months
later. at San Jose he omitted from his re-
marks the statements In his prepared text
calling for a restoration of freedom to Cuba.
The Vice President said, "We want to get rid
of Castro," only to have this declaration re-
vised by McGeorge Bundy to read "we can-
not sympathize" with Castro's "course of
policy" and "we must range ourselves"
against IL.
From time to time the administration has
given the impression that the presence of
Soviet troops and military equipment in
Cuba produces Important advantages for the
United States. Sometimes it is said that the
Soviet presence makes Cuba "a showcase of
Communist failure" and turns the people of
other Latin American states away from Com-
munists. Sometimes it is said that the
maintenance of Soviet forces in Cuba Im-
poses an economic strain on the Communist
world. Sometimes it is said that the Soviets
exercise a restraining influence on the vola-
tile Cuban Government.
The Inadequacies of statements of policy
would be less important if the actions of the
Administration revealed a consistent and pur-
poseful movement toward a clearly recog-
nized objective. But the actions of the ad-
ministration have been an inconsistent as Its
words.
The Attorney General, who said In April
1961, "The neutrality laws were never de-
signed to prevent individuals from leaving
the United States to fight for a cause in
which they believe" has confined a score of
Cuban exile leaders to the Miami areas. He
has shown great vigor in providing immunity
from exile attack to Cuba and to Cuban ship-
ping. The President, who declared that the
quarantine of last October would be main-
tined until United Nations inspection of the
withdrawal of Soviet missiles was obtained,
ended the quarantine without securing on-
site inspection to verity the removal of the
missiles.
There can be no doubt that the adminis-
tration would prefer that the Soviet Union
pull out of Cuba and that It hopes that Castro
will disappear. This wishful thinking, how-
ever, does not constitute a policy goal. There
Is a world of difference between a wish that
the existing situation change and a deter-
mination to do all within our power to bring
about a change.
A PROPOSAL FOR A NEW CUBAN RESOLUTION
This Nation has a historic policy opposing
intervention In this hemisphere by despotism
with which the United States could coexist?"
Is the administration "looking toward some
kind 'of reconciliation, perhaps on the basis
of a Tito-type arrangement for Cuba?"
-The President has been careful not to
declare openly that the Monroe Doctrine
either does not apply In the Cuban case at
this particular time or that it is an obsolete
political concept in terms of present-day
realities. But the administration spokesmen
have made it fairly clear that the President
does not believe that the Monroe Doctrine
In really applicable under the present cir-
cumstances," Ted Saule, New York Times,
Sept. 23, 1982.
"'Issues and Answers" ABC-TV Oct. 14,
1962.
July- 29
based in other parts of the world-a policy
laid down on December 2, 1823, by James
Monroe.
President Monroe asserted that "we could
not view any interposition for the purpose
of oppressing" Latin American states "or con-
trolling in any other manner their destiny,
by any European power, in any light, than as
the manifestation of an unfriendly disposi-
tion toward the United States." He warned
that "we should consider any attempt" on
the part of European powers "to extend their
system to any portion of this hemisphere, as
dangerous to our peace and safety."
The Monroe Doctrine barred any further
"Interposition" by European powers to extend
their system or exercise control in this hemi-
sphere. It said simply, "Hands off." It made
no distinction between offensive and defen-
sive weapons or between forcible and pacific
means of intervention,
The purpose of the Monroe Doctrine, as
Elihu Root once explained, was to prevent
the development of a situation that could
endanger hemispheric security. The Ken-
nedy doctrine, by contrast, appears to per-
mit intervention by non-American states in
this hemisphere up to the point at which a
danger to security has reached an acute
stage. The difference between the Mon-
roe Doctrine and the Kennedy doctrine is the
difference between preventative medical care
and treatment which begins after the de-
velopment of a high fever.
In earlier periods of our history the Gov-
ernment of the United States asserted that
the Monroe Doctrine barred the presence
of Spanish troops in Santo Domingo and the
establishment of a French puppet emperor
in Mexico. In 1940 Secretary of State Cordell
Hull served notice that the Monroe Doctrine
prohibited the exercise on any authority by
Axis Powers over any part of the hemisphere.'
In 1940, Franklin D. Roosevelt extended the
Monroe Doctrine to Greenland and sent
American troops to that Island to forestall
Nazi occupation.
In 1912, when Mexico proposed leasing to
a Japanese fishing company, a port area in
Lower California, the U.S. Senate, re-
lying on the Monroe Doctrine, asserted
"? s * when any harbor or other place in
the American Continents is so situated that
the occupation thereof for naval or military
purposes might threaten the communica-
tions or the safety of the United States, the
Government of the United States could not
see without grave concern the possession of
such harbor or other place by any corpora-
tion or association' which has such a rela-
tion to another government, not American,
as to give that government practical power
of control for national purposes."
In 1954 Secretary of State John Foster
Dulles declared that "the Intrusion of Soviet
despotism (in Guatemala) was a direct chal-
lenge to our Monroe Doctrine, the first and
most fundamental of our foreign policies."
With the Assistance of the United States,
4 It is interesting to note that the argu-
ment used by Hitler's government and re-
jected by Hull in 1940. contending that U.S.
participation in the affairs of Europe made
the Monroe Doctrine obsolete, was adopted
by Senator JOHN SPARKMAN.
"The nonintervention in the affairs
of the American Continent by European na-
tions which is demanded by the Monroe
Doctrine can in principle be legally valid only
on condition that the American nations for
their part do not interfere in the affairs of
the European Continent," Von Ribbentrop,
July 1, 1940.
"This change has greatly altered the con-
ditions governing our implementation of the
Monroe Doctrine, which was based in part
on the assumption that the nations of the
Western Hemisphere would reman unin-
volved in the conflicts of Europe," Senator
JOHN SPARKMAN, Sept. 20, 1962.
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963 Approved For FV4 1 O'1`A0%_ P SBUG 00200250020-3 . 12837
loyal Guatemalans removed their Communist
rulers forthwith.
Along with the United States, the other
nations of the hemisphere have used the
language of Monroe to serve notice that tres-
passing is forbidden to communism. The
Ninth Inter-American Conference at Bogota
in 1948 condemned "interference by any
foreign power, or by any political organiza-
tion serving the interest of a foreign power,
in the public life of the nations of the Amer-
ican Continent." The 10th Inter-Ameri-
can Conference at Caracas in 1954 declared
that "the domination of control of the politi-
cal institutions of any American State by
the International Communist movement, ex-
tending to this hemisphere the political sys-
tem of any extracontinental power, would
constitute a threat to the sovereignty and
pgl,itical independence of the American
States, endangering the peace of America."
Three years ago Khrushchev told the
world that the Monroe Doctrine was dead,
saying "the remains of this doctrine should
be buried as every dead body is, so that it
does not poison the air by its decay." The
Eisenhower administration replied, "* * *
the principles of the Monroe Doctrine are as
valid today as they were in 1823 when the
doctrine was proclaimed." The Kennedy
administration has so far failed to contra-
dict Khrushchev either by word or by deed.
What is needed is the positive policy of
the Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine
is being violated by the presence of Soviet
troops in Cuba-whatever their strength,
whatever the nature of their equipment.
The doctrine is being violated as long as
there is any type of Soviet Intervention in
Cuba.
The removal of Soviet troops and the
elimination of other types of Soviet Interven-
tion in Cuba is an urgent policy objective.
The ultimate objective of U.S. policy must
be the elimination of the Communist re-
gime in Cuba and its replacement by a gov-
ernment freely chosen by the Cuban people.
Let the President and the Congress act.
APPENDIX I-ATTITUDES ON THE SCOPE AND
STATUS OF THE MONROE DOCTRINE BY RE-
SPONSIBLE SPOKESMEN OF THE LAST FOUR
ADMINISTRATIONS
Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-45), Cordell
Hull, July 5, 1940:
"The Monroe Doctrine is solely a policy of
self-defense, which is intended to preserve
the independence and integrity of the
Americas. It was, and is, designed to prevent
aggression in this hemisphere on the part of
any non-American power, and likewise to
make impossible any further extension to
this hemisphere of any non-American system
of government imposed from without. * * *
It made clear that the future transfer of
existing possessions to another non-American
state would be regarded as inimical to the
interests of this hemisphere. This has be-
come a basic policy of the Government of
the United States."
Cordell Hull, April 12, 1940:
"There is an express application of the
Monroe Doctrine by the United States re-
garding Greenland. There appears to be no
serious question about Greenland forming
part of this hemisphere as contradistin-
guished from the European side of the At-
lantic. * * * The German forces occupying
Denmark could easily cause the Govern-
ment of Denmark to issue order about
Greenland, as they could about Danish ship-
ping throughout the world. For this reason
it's important that Greenland should receive
our attention under the Monroe Doctrine."
Public Law 32, 77th Congress, approved
April 19, 1941:
"Resolved by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
American in Congress assembled, (1) That
the United States would not recognize any
No. 114-17
transfer, and would not acquiesce in any
attempt to transfer, any geographic region
of this hemisphere from one non-American
power to another non-American power."
Harry S. Truman (1945-53), President
Truman, December 27, 1945:
"We believe that the sovereign states of
the Western Hemisphere, without interfer-
ence from outside the Western Hemisphere,
must work together as good neighbors in the
solution of their common problems."
President Truman, April 5, 1947:
"When we hear the cry of freedom aris-
ing from the shores beyond our own, we can
take heart from the words of Thomas Jeffer-
son. In his letter to President Monroe, urg-
ing the adoption of what we now know as the
Monroe Doctrine, he wrote: 'Nor is the oc-
casion to be slighted which this proposition
offers of declaring our protest against the
atrocious violations of the rights of nations
by the interference of any one in the internal
affairs of another.'
"We, like Jefferson, have witnessed atro-
cious violations of the rights of nations.
"We, too, have regarded them as occasions
not to be slighted.
"We, too, have declared our protest.
"We must make that protect effective by
aiding those peoples whose freedoms are
endangered by foreign pressures.
"We must take a positive stand. It is no
longer enough merely to say 'We don't want
war.' We must act in time-ahead of time-
to stamp out the smoldering beginnings of
any conflict that may threaten to spread
over the world."
Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-61), John
Foster Dulles, June 30, 1954:
"This intrusion of Soviet despotism [in
Guatemala] was, of course, a direct chal-
lenge to our Monroe Doctrine, the first and
most fundamental of our foreign policies."
John Foster Dulles, June 30, 1954:
"If world communism captures any Ameri-
can state, however small, a new and perilous
front is established which will increase the
danger to the entire free world and require
even greater sacrifices from the American
people."
John Foster Dulles, March 4, 1954:
"It is time to make it clear with finality
that we see that alien (i.e., Communist)
despotism is hostile to our ideals, that we
unitedly deny it the right of prey upon our
hemisphere and that if it does not heed our
warning and keep away we shall deal with
it as a situation that might endanger the
peace of America * * *. There is no place
here for political institutions which served
alien masters."
Henry Cabot Lodge, June 20, 1954:
"I say to you, representative of the Soviet
Union, stay out of this hemisphere and don't
try to start your plans and your conspiracies
over here."
Department of State, July 14, 1960:
"The principles of the Monroe Doc-
trine are as valid today as they were in 1823
when the Doctrine was proclaimed."
John F. Kennedy (1961 to date), John F.
Kennedy, September 13, 1962:'
"Question. Will it require force to con-
travene the Monroe Doctrine or does the
presence of a foreign power In any force, but
not using that force in this hemisphere,
amount to contravention of the doctrine?"
"The PRESIDENT. Well, I have indicated
that if Cuba should possess a capacity to
carry out offensive action against the United
States, that the United States would act. I
have also indicated that the United States
would not permit Cuba to export its power by
force in the hemisphere."
Congressman WAYNE HAYS, Democrat, of
Ohio, September 26, 1962:
"I think if a determination is made that
the buildup in Cuba reaches a point where it
is a threat to the United States, then it is
a violation of the Monroe Doctrine.
Senator, JOHN SPARKMAN, Democrat, of
Alabama, September 20, 1962:
"This change has greatly altered the con-
ditions governing our implementation of
the Monroe Doctrine, which was based in
part on the assumption that the nations of
the Western Hemisphere would remain un-
involved in the conflicts of Europe. But in
discharging our obligations under the Mon-
roe Doctrine, we must act with full regard
for the fact that the problem of Cuba and of
Communist designs in the Western Hemi-
sphere is not an isolated one but part of
our worldwide struggle against Communist
Imperialism."
Senator Dennis Chavez, Democrat, of New
Mexico, September 20, 1962:
"How can we justify saying we object to
the Russians being in Cuba when we have
a base within 60 miles of the Russian border
in Turkey? I have been at our airbase in
Turkey, 60 miles from Russia. How can we
justify that and at the same time object to
the Russians being in Cuba?"
Senator STEPHEN YOUNG, Democrat, of
Ohio, September 20, 1962:
"The Monroe Doctrine has been altered
because we have foreign commitments and
responsibilities.
"I submit, therefore, that we can neither
morally nor realistically take action which
would jeopardize the security and independ-
ence of our allies.
"It is not the same Monroe Doctrine as
that of 1823; and our historians have been
reporting that fact to us for some decades.
They are correct."
Congressman CORNELIUS GALLAGHER, Dem-
ocrat, of New Jersey, September 26, 1962:
"The Monroe Doctrine of 150 years ago has
been amended by the necessity of a Kennedy
doctrine which recognizes that a few sailing
ships and men armed with muskets differs
critically from a thoughtless armed action
which can escalate into a nuclear holocaust
and incinerate the Western Hemisphere."
Congressman ELMER J. HOLLAND, Democrat,
of Pennsylvania, September 28, 1962:
Mr. HOLLAND inserted in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD an editorial which was entitled,
"Monroe: Obsolete Doctrine." The editorial
said, "The Monroe Doctrine is dead." Con-
gressman HOLLAND called it (p. A178) "An
excellent editorial on the present 'hot' cold-
war situation. * * * It is good to know that
we have responsible and levelheaded publish-
ers and editors throughout the Nation who
are dedicated to reporting the facts."
Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, is there
any doubt what the intention of com-
munism is in this hemisphere? Castro
has stated it as clearly and unequivo-
cally as he could. Khrushchev has stat-
ed it as clearly and unequivocally as he
could as I cited in my resolution.
What is bothering many of us further
are the accommodations that are being
sought and being accomplished between
this Government and that of Cuba and
Castro.
We are concerned about flights being
permitted to fly over the United States
with the acquiescence and the approval
of the Federal Aviation Agency-that is
nonscheduled Cuban flights.
We are all concerned about Canadian
flights over the United States trading
with Cuba.
We are concerned about these trade
loopholes I mentioned.
We are concerned about this travel to
Cuba.
We are concerned about the fact that
the United States demanded no further
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved FoC,N@RiBS&@QMt,0AEP ,F P6f ??3R000200250020-3 July 29
refugee raids not only from the United
States but from Puerto Rico as well. I
repeat-that was the first of Castro's de-
mands on October 28 of last year when
the blockade was in effect-that we must
stop all refugee raids on Cuba. This
has been accomplished as an accommo-
dation.
We ought to require adequate surveil-
lance of these Communist arms drops to
these other countries in this hemisphere.
We are also concerned about this latest
deal or accommodation that is being
discussed.
I am reading from the Washington
News of Friday, the 26th:
The spokesman for a commercial refugee
transportation project from Havana to Mi-
eami says about 600 Cuban refugees will ar-
rive here by boat within the next 10 to 14
days.
The refugees will be the vanguard of an
attempt to remove about 325,000 Cubans
from the Communist island who hold U.B.
visa waivers, attorney Jack Nageley said yes-
terday.
Mr. Nageley represents Harold Derber,
president of Empress Lines, Ltd., promoters
of the project.
I called this to the attention of the
House last week. Apparently a deal has
been made with Castro so far as this
company is concerned, to open up the
shipping lines between Key West and
Havana.
I made a protest about this, and I
hope it is not accomplished. But in in-
vestigating this matter I found out this
interesting fact. That following the
quarantine there were 19 air repatria-
tion flights in which some 87 to 160 per-
sons claiming U.S. citizenship and their
immediate dependents were permitted to
come back to the United States. Then
Castro cut it off. This following infor-
mation is what I am talking about when
I talk about deals and accommodations.
On February 27 a negotiation took
place between the Castro government
and someone on behalf of the United
States. Through the Swiss Embassy,
the State Department advises. Through
James Donovan other sources advise.
Five ships have come through as a re-
stilt of the deal that was worked out.
Some 4.100 passengers from Cuba have
been brought to this country. Of those,
do you know who named 50 percent of
them under this deal? Do you know
who decided who 50 percent of these
people coming into the United States on
these 5 ships should be? Fidel Castro is
who. The ships were the Survey, two
trips, the Morning Light, and the Maxi-
mus. The United States decided only
who 50 percent of the people on these
ships would be. Fidel Castro decided on
the other 50 percent. This has nothing
to do with the ransom deal. These are
additional refugees permitted to be
brought into this country. We named
50 percent of them, because of our in-
terest, and justifiably so, in getting 900
additional Americans out of Cuba. But
the price we had to pay was that Castro
had the right to name the other 50 per-
cent or 2,050 persons coming into this
country on those ships in recent months.
Mr. Speaker, that is what we are con-
cerned about. Why should such deals
as these be made with Fidel Castro?
Why should such accommodations as
these be made? What does the rest of
the world and what does Latin America
think of such accommodations? They
obivously think we are weak, that we
do not have any real determination to
meet this threat of Communism in this
hemisphere. That is the concern of
many of us-this sign of weakness, par-
ticularly to the Latin American nations.
They understand and admire signs of
strength-they justifiably abhor signs of
softness and weakness.
Mr. Speaker, to conclude, permit me
to say this: The Organization of Amer-
ican States is a fine instrument to ac-
complish the objective of getting rid of
communism and subversion in this hem-
isphere. But only under one condition-
strong U.S. leadership. Many Latin
American governments acknowledge this
privately. Only with strong unequivocal
leadership, only, with a definite plan of
action by the United States of America,
can the growing Communist cancer in
this hemisphere be stopped.
U.S. leadership is what has made the
Organization of American States effec-
tive in the past. That is what has given
us the results at the conferences that
were mentioned by the distinguished
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
WEAVER], in combatilig communism. It
is because of the U.S. leadership. That
is what has done it.
Mr. Speaker, if the United States per-
mits a vacuum in this leadership to exist,
which exists today, or to persist in per-
mitting such vacuum as exists today,
then the Organization of American
States is not going to be the instrument
through which this can be accomplished.
So, Mr. Speaker, I think it is time that
the United States anounced a firm, posi-
tive, step-by-step plan of action intended
to be taken and ask for support of the
OAS. In my opinion you are not going
to have these recalcitrant Latin nations
that we have today with that firm lead-
ership-and the first step is to restore
and announce our intention to fully im-
plement the Monroe Doctrine.
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MARSH. I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Illinois, but I would
point out to the gentleman that several
other Members hope to speak on this
subject.
I yield to the gentleman for the pur-
pose of his responding to the gentleman
from Florida [Mr. CRAMER].
Mr. PUCINSKI. I thank the gentle-
man from Virginia. I do not think I
shall consume that much time.
I am sure. Mr. Speaker, that no one
will find violent disagreement with what
the gentleman from Florida suggested.
The program he suggests is one that
has been discussed here on the floor of
the House throughout the afternoon and
I would support it. However, the point
we made in the earlier colloquy is that
it does not serve any purpose here to
try to define or elaborate upon the meth-
ods and the steps which led to earlier
failures, because if one wants to do that
one would have to go all the way
back to the Rio treaty which was signed
by Mr. Dulles and which stated that no
American state shall interfere, overtly or
otherwise, in the internal affairs of an-
other American state.
Mr. Speaker, I protested against that
treaty at that time, and I still protest
against it today. Therefore, I think it is
those who try to confuse the unity of
America in trying to rid Cuba of com-
munism by digging into these past ac-
tions who are really doing the great dis-
service to this country. I think those
who really want to do something about
Cuba and who are interested in getting
rid of the Communists in Cuba will
engage in the kind of discussions that
we have had here today, where sound
suggestions are made and where they
are subject to full discussion by the
Members of Congress.
I think that this kind of action on the
part of the Congress will demonstrate
not only to the administration and the
people in the State Department but to
all of our neighbors in South America,
yes, throughout the world, and most
important to Mr. Khrushchev and the
Kremlin, that the Congress of the United
States, speaking for the people of the
United States, wants to do everything
humanly possible to get the Communists
out of Cuba and the Western Hemi-
sphere just as quickly as possible.
I can only repeat to my friend from
Florida this is the road to victory in the
Western Hemisphere, not confusing the
issue about whether or not we got on-
sight inspection or did not get it. We
did not get on-sight inspection because
Mr. Castro did not want to agree to
that. I said before and I will say again,
those who say we ought to go in there
and do it ought to go the full length and
say "Let us invade Cuba." I say, as
other gentlemen have said, there are
other ways of bringing the Communists
to their knees. Many of these ways were
discussed today. There are other peace-
ful ways of ridding Cuba of communism.
I feel certain that the day when commu-
nism will be driven out of Cuba is not
too far away.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
who spoke during this special order to-
day, including myself, may have per-
mission to revise and extend their re-
marks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Lia-
ONATI). Is there objection to the re-
quest of the gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, at this
time I yield to the gentleman from South
Carolina [Mr. WATSON].
Mr. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, I want
to thank the distinguished gentleman
from Virginia for giving me this oppor-
tunity to participate in the discussion
today. It is passingly strange, and cer-
tainly it is more than coincidental, that
the two gentlemen who serve as coordi-
nators for this particular emphasis on
Cuba should come from the various States
that they do. I refer to my distinguished
colleague from Pennsylvania [Mr. WEAV-
ER], who is one of the representatives
from the great State of Pennsylvania
where the first bells of freedom tolled
many years ago for this country, and,
then, also to the distinguished gentleman
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963 Approved Forft#;WE2"&Q,3 RIft@PFi5,R000200250020-3 12839
from'Virginia [Mr. MARSH], who repre-
sents a State which probably has given
this Nation more of our leaders in the past
than any other State in the Union-the
man who represents the State from which
Thomas Jefferson came, who said we
should always oppose the forces of tyran-
ny. It is passing strange that you who
represent these particular States should
be taking the lead in this discussion as
we are trying to find a bipartisan ap-
proach to bringing liberty and freedom
to the oppressed people of Cuba.
I was very interested in the discussion
a moment ago as to whose fault is it that
we are presently confronted with this
great problem. As I heard the discus-
sion I was reminded of the story that
was told of the man who introduced a
new deodorant and he merely called it
"Stereo." It did not kill the odor, but it
fixed it so you could not tell where it
came from.
If we are going to try to place posi-
tively and affirmatively the fault for our
present situation, then we can debate
here ad infinitum, and we are going to
defeat the very purpose of this discus-
sion here today.
Our sole objective is to try to focus the
attention of Congress, the administra-
tion, and the American people on this
particular problem, with the hope of en-
couraging positive steps toward a solu-
tion to it. I do not care whether you
would try to attribute it to past admin-
istrations or not. The fact is that the
past administration is past, and any at-
tempt to place blame there, although
justified, serves to make a solution more
difficult. We can only deal with the
present administration, and we can only
solve the problem as we have it today.
So, as a consequence, I hope all of you
will construe these remarks as being di-
rected toward trying to find a solution
to the problem, rather than trying to
be especially critical of any particular
administration or any particular action
which has occurred in the past.
We do have a serious problem. I be-
lieve that this discussion here will sil-
ence, once and for all, those who have
said that many of us have been only criti-
cal and never constructive concerning
our foreign policy, or the absence of a
foreign policy, in reference to Cuba. Be-
cause we, during the past two and a half
hours, and probably for another half an
hour or so, have repeatedly advanced
concrete, positive programs with regard
to something which should be done in
order to rid the Western Hemisphere of
this Communist cancer in Cuba. So I
believe without question that the Amer-
ican people are no longer going to listen
to the cry that there are many in Con-
gress and throughout the Nation who will
be critical of our foreign policy about
Cuba but who are not offering construc-
tive proposals for doing something posi-
tive about it.
We have had numerous proposals here,
time and again, in which the speakers
have said, "We support your proposals
and we believe they deserve the serious
consideration of Congress, of the Execu-
tive, and of the American people." So
this discussion should silence once and
for all those who would say that we
would be obstructionists, that we would
be critical without offering positive al-
ternatives for improvements in the rela-
tionships that exist between this country
and Cuba.
Another thing that is very logical-
and I believe a very helpful proposition
as far as this discussion is concerned-
is that this discussion should allay the
fears of those who would say that any
positive step would be an act of war and
would precipitate a nuclear holocaust, or
would bring about an escalation into a
nuclear war. Franklin, I believe, said
"I have no way to shed light upon the
future except from the lamp of the past,"
Let us look at our experience on this
score, because every one of you and the
others in this body and the American
people do not want war. The American
people have been the champions of peace
and freedom from time immemorial. I
have known war personally-and I am
not being a demagog here-as I am
sure others of you have seen it in past
wars. It causes me a great deal of con-
cern to realize that we have weapons of
destruction which are unimaginable,
comparatively speaking, to the power
and destruction which we had in World
War IT. Why, I understand even one
nuclear submarine has sufficient de-
structive fire power on it to equal all of
the combined bombs that were dropped
during World War IT. We do not want
war, and I believe veritably that experi-
ence will show that the positive steps
suggested here will not lead to war. In-
deed, just the opposite may very well be
true; they are necessary to preserve
peace.
From time immemorial the Commu-
nists have proven they only recognize
force. We can enter into treaties, we can
try to bargain with them,.but their basic
principle is, "I will keep what I have, and
we will bargain with what you have."
We have to be firm and strong. Expe-
rience has shown that when we stood
firm the Communists backed down.
Look at what happened in October, and
bear in mind that in October there were
missiles on Cuba pointed toward this
great land of freedom. There were ap-
proximately 20,000 Soviet soldiers in
Cuba at that time. However, we took a
firm stand in October, and, notwith-
standing the facts that they had their
missiles pointed toward us and that they
had approximately twice as many Rus-
sian soldiers as they allegedly have
now-and we do not have any truly ac-
curate way of determining the correct
number-there ,was no nuclear war. Is
it not reasonable to conclude-and we all
are logical and reasonable men-that if
the Russians did not precipitate a war
and did not move into war at that time
when Cuba had the missiles which they
presumably do not have now, and where
they had twice as many men in Cuba,
which they presumably do not have now,
then how can we justifiably say, follow-
ing logical reasoning, that if we were to
take positive, definite steps at this time
it would precipitate a nucleai war? His-
tory does not bear that out. We need to
be firm and positive.
There is certainly one thing which will
allow a continued buildup in Cuba and
which will allow a continued extension of
subversion throughout the Western
Hemisphere, and that is to continue do-
ing nothing, to have half-hearted ap-
proaches. To be sure, we have imposed
an embargo on the particular vessels
which go into Cuba.
As someone pointed out earlier, this is
about as ineffective as anything anyone
possibly could propose. Some shipping
lines will use only one vessel in trading
with Cuba and then use all of their other
vessels to come to the United States.
I would like to see us extend this em-
bargo, making it not only apply to the
individual vessel but, rather, applying it
to the shipping line. We will say to him,
Mr. Shipper, if you deal with Cuba, not
only will that one vessel be prohibited
from coming into our ports, but all of
your vessels will be prohibited from com-
ing here. And if that is not effective, let
us go one step further and say to the
foreign countries involved that if these
shipping lines continue to trade with
Cuba, then we will consider withholding
foreign aid.
We need to take positive, definite steps.
Unfortunately, with regard to any step
that is proposed, the argument could be
raised against it that it is a step of ag-
gression and will precipitate a nuclear
war. Let me say again, as I have under-
scored before, that if the Russians did
not-and they did not-precipitate a
war back in October when they were
much stronger militarily in Cuba, then
if we take positive steps in the way of
extending and tightening our embargo
and in the matter of recognizing some
provisional, free Cuban government
somewhere in the Western Hemisphere,
those steps will not precipitate a war.
Over the last few months, we have had
a lot of discussion on the subject of
Cuba. I dare say that we have had no
less than 75 individual resolutions which
have been introduced, during my limited
service here in the Congress of the
United States. We can continue to dis-
cuss this matter, but I think it is high
time that we do something to implement
our discussions. Personally I am quite
concerned, as I am sure most of you are,
with the fact that so many of these reso-
lutions that have been applauded by
the American people and have been ap-
proved by many of you individually, have
not been acted upon by the various com-
mittees of this Congress. I realize that
we have serious domestic problems con-
fronting us. But I will tell you truly
that no problem is more important than
this matter of Cuba.
We can talk to the uncommitted na-
tions of the world until we are blue in
the face and say that "if you side with
us, we will fight for you." But they will
take a look and say, "Well, what have
you done to the Communist menace just
90 miles off your shoreline?" We can
try to impress upon them that we are
lovers of freedom and believe in going
to any extent to keep the Western Hemi-
sphere free from the Communists, but as
long as we let Cuba remain in its pres-
ent condition we are tilting at wind-
mills. We may as well face up to it that
all of these other actions, all of these
other theoretical proposals, nice sounding
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 12S 10 Approved
For Wg9NtQXP3R R&1W@q3R000200250020-3 -July 29
as they might be, are going to amount
to absolutley nothing in convincing the
uncommitted nations that we will stand
up for freedom as long as we allow Castro
to remain and to keep the people of
Cuba under bondage. It is a choice that
we have got to make, and if the Execu-
tive is not willing to face up to it, we as
Members of Congress must face up to it.
The reason I say that is because, ulti-
rnately. it will be our responsibility if, as
has been suggested, actual invasion
might be necessary.
In that connection. America has never
been a coward. America has never
backed off in the matter of preserving
freedom and giving freedom to the peo-
ples of the world simply because it might
mean war.
I repeat, as we stand firm in support-
ing these measures which have been pro-
posed here, that I believe these will be
the steps not toward the war which all
of us wish to avoid, but these will be
steps toward peace and toward the down-
fall of Castro and of all those who would
follow his Communist line in the West-
ern Hemisphere.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10
minutes to the gentleman from New
Hampshire [Mr. WYMAN ] .
Mr. WYMAN. Mr. Speaker, I join in
this discussion with great interest for as
many of you know I have long been
deeply concerned by these problems. I
have some questions some observations
and some recommendations.
When are we going to take affirmative
action to get the Communists out of
Cuba? When will we face up to the fact
that no amount of help to other Latin
or South American countries can be ef-
fective as long as the dike is breached
in Cuba? When will we admit that as
long the Castro government receives
massive aid from the Soviet Union, both
military and economic, it is not going to
fall from within?
It is little short of criminal that this
Nation has not long ago acted firmly and
decisively to run the Communists out of
Cuba. The great majority of the Amer-
ican people would solidly support such
a policy, even one in which the use of
force might become necessary.
We look foolish urging Britain not to
let the Communists take over British
Guiana when Communists stole Cuba
and are holding it right under our noses.
British Guiana is nowhere near the con-
cern to Britain that Cuba is to the United
States. We are fine ones to urge leader-
ship and decisiveness on others when we
do not exercise it ourselves.
Under the separation of powers. the
responsibility for Executive control of
the Government is in the Executive, not
the Congress.
We have passed resolutions asking the
Executive to act in Cuba. Members of
this body have spoken repeatedly indi-
eating support for firm Executive action.
yet none has been forthcoming.
Mr. Speaker, the dismal truth is that
we have no policy on Cuba to amount to
a hill of beans. With all due respect
to the various high offices involved in the
executive department whose responsi-
bility it is to deal with such situations.
we have witnessed for far too long, addle-
headed. chicken-hearted. and ignorant
timidity on the part of the American
Government faced by Communist mili-
tary action in Cuba. We once had a
Monroe Doctrine. but you would scarcely
know it in the State Department or the
White House. We started on the right
road in October only to abandon it In
short order and then sit back while the
situation has deteriorated to our disad-
vantage ever since.
It is astonishing but true that Instead
of building up and supporting Cubans
who want to liberate their homeland
and replace Castro with a government
friendly to the United States, we have
dispersed the Cubans all over this coun-
try. Hit-and-run attacks with their
stimulus to morale and their obvious an-
noyance to the Communists we officially
prevented. There has been no call or
even demand by this country backed up
by anything other than the usual diplo-
yzatic hogwash, to inspect the island of
Cuba, although every person in the exec-
utive branch must admit that we do not
know whet-her offensive missiles once
there have all been removed or what has
been brought back by submarine or in the
dark of night.
To listen to the Department of State,
one would get the impression that it is
believed that there can be negotiations
with Communists that will result in
agreements that can both be relied upon
for Communist performance and will
operate in the Interests of the United
States If performed. This is a dismal
ignorance of the true nature of the Com-
munist beast. Communists and com-
munism simply will not enter Into any
agreement that does not serve Commu-
nist purposes, nuclear test ban treaty or
what 'have you. Neither will Commu-
nists perform any commitments under-
taketr by treaty or otherwise when it Is
in their interest not to perform. Com-
munists are not ordinary, reasonable
men and women, with conscience and
honor and principle. Communists are
20th-century nihilists, international
gangsters, ruthless murderers, saboteurs,
espionage agents and atheists. Their
single goal, their fanatic determination,
their obsessed and obsessing objective is
the destruction of this country by force
or any way they can do it. Khrushchev
was the butcher of the Ukraine. Does
any one really believe he has changed?
Do leopards change their spots?
Mr. Speaker, I fail to see how any
government of this country regardless
of party can make claim to the right to
continue as a government when it fails
the American people in this hour of need,
in this crucial contest. No government
worthy of the name can tolerate con-
tinued Communist military potential in
Cuba or any other place in Central or
Latin America. The political party of
the Chief Executive makes no difference
when it comes to such an issue. As
Chairman of the Internal Security Com-
mittee of the National Association of
Attorneys General in San Francisco in
July of 1960. I was extremely critical of
then President Eisenhower's lack of
firmness in dealing with Castro's expro-
priations of U.S. interests in Cuba. At
that time, more than 3 years ago, I spoke
of the construction in Cuba of Soviet
missile launching bases. Let no man,
whether he is President of the United
States or the Secretary of Defense or the
Chief of the Central Intelligence Agency,
claim that it was not and has not been
known day in and day out, month in
and month out, year in and year out,
that the Communists in Cuba have been
steadily building a military potential di-
rected against the United States of
America.
Consider carefully the full implication
of these facts. It is a damning indict-
ment of individuals and governments
who call themselves American who want
the cheesecake, the black limousines, the
titles and the rank but who when the
chips are down have not got the guts nor
the will to lead to win against the Com-
munists.
This situation has not changed to
date. We have no policy. We have no
courage. We have no will to win at the
top. And this Is deeply distressing to
men and women all over America-to
Members of this House on both sides
of the aisle who know that this is not
properly a partisan problem.
And while I'm on the subject of the
military buildup in Cuba, let me say this.
We have not been told all about the bad
things that have been built there. We
the people have not had pictures of sub-
marine installations nor reports of the
locations and contents of the many hun-
dreds of caves, nor the concrete works
and the disappearing turrets, nor many
such installations, none of which can
fairly or justly be said to relate to the
defense of Cuba. They are offensive,
against the United States. They have no
business being there, Mr. Speaker. They
should be razed. They should be de-
stroyed. Affirmative action to do this is
not imperialism. Before God and in the
name of justice and freedom no Com-
munist government has a right to exist
In this hemisphere except as its peoples
may voluntary elect it-which never
happens.
Now what should be our policy? Three
things are fundamental.
First. There must be a continuing in-
spection of all of the island of Cuba at
will and on a daily basis by inspecting
teams, preferably of the United Nations
with United States membership, but if
not, by United States inspecting teams.
If this inspection discloses offensive
weaponry of war-which it will-this
weaponry should be dumped into the sea.
Again, preferably by the United Nations
with United States participation, but if
not, by the United States alone.
Second. The United States should de-
clare that Castro must go, and that he
must not be succeeded by a Communist
leadership, and that-and here is the im-
portant part. the teeth-this Govern-
ment is prepared to blockade by sea, land,
and air until Castro and communism
withers on the vine. It may be that in
the course of the withering there will be
much suffering and perhaps some loss of
life, but this is a small price to pay meas-
ured against the horrible destructions
certain to be inflicted upon the United
States and its allies from a Communist
controlled and monitored Cuba, armed
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 128. Approved For Rele&(6~glfA~IBp8ftOO&%0200250020-3
July P9
Any attempt on the part of a non-Ameri-
can State against the integrity of inviolabil-
ity of the territory, the sovereignty or the
political independence of an American State
shall be considered an act of aggression
against the states which sign this declara-
tion.
In 1947, the American nations signed
the Rio Treaty. This historic document
is actually a collective defense treaty.
Its purpose was to anticipate what has
happened in Cuba and provide machin-
ery to do something about it.
Now then, what does it provide. In
article 0, if a situation endangers the
peace of the Americas it states that the
OAS should meet immediately to agree
on measures for the common defense
and for maintenance of peace and se-
curity of the continents.
Article 8 lists the measures which
may be authorized and among them are:
"partial or complete interruption of eco-
nomic relations on rail, sea, air com-
munications, and use of armed forces.
Most of the member nations are vio-
lently opposed to communism in gen-
eral and the Castro regime in particular.
For example, at the meeting of the
American foreign ministers on October
2 and 3, 1962, recognized in forceful lan-
guage the threat of the Communist Cuba
regime to all of Latin America.
During the Cuban crisis the OAS
Council met on October 23, and adopted
unanimously a resolution which: First,
called for withdrawal from Cuba of all
missile and other offensive weapons; and
second, that member states, to be all
measures, individuals, and collectively
in dealing with the armed forces to in-
sure that Cuba would not continue to
receive military supplies from the Soviet
bloc.
The OAS backed up the United States
to the hilt.
Eight countries offered the United
States military aid.
What does all this show? That what
is urgently needed, what the nations of
the hemisphere are crying for is forth-
right, aggressive leadership on the part
of the United States. As the most pow-
erful nation, as the leader of the free
world, they must rely upon us to back
them up in decisive action against Castro
and communism. When we provided ag-
gressive leadership, as in the beginning
of the Cuban crisis, the Latin American
States were solidly with us.
What can be done? One solution is
simple. Overnight, much of the sub-
versive pressures against Latin America
from Cuba would be largely eliminated
if this simple action was taken by the
Organization of American States: First,
forbid all travel between Cuba and the
Latin American States; and, second, stop
all trade between Cuba and the Latin
American States; Castro's bad economic
plight would be worsened.
Let us look at an example. The
principal route of subversive trainees
into and out of Cuba is through Mexico
City and via Cubana Airways. Mexico
is our closest Latin American neighbor.
Vast quantities of American dollars in
aid and in trade bolster the Mexican
economy each year. It is time to talk
turkey with Mexico and insist on her
putting an end to this pipeline of sub-
versives.
This Nation has embarked in a massive
foreign aid program in Latin America-
the Alliance for Progress. The whole
foundation for foreign aid program is to
halt the progress of communism
throughout the world. It occurs to me
that a prerequisite of this aid should be
cessation of trade with Cuba. What
better way to fight communism?
If all of the members of the Organiza-
tion of American States will not go along
with this simple two-point program, then
I suggest it is time to separate the wheat
from the chaff-let us extend the hand of
friendship and of aid to our friends and
withdraw it from those who prefer to
flirt with Castro and communism.
I say further that when we assume a
role of clear-cut leadership in this hemi-
sphere against Castro and communism,
we will find the Organization of Ameri-
can States and its individual members
rallying to our cause.
The Latins respect strength. We had
no trouble getting their unanimous sup-
port during World War II against the
Nazi-Axis aggression. Nor will we now
in 1963 against the Communist goal of
world conquest, if we will but assume
the role of leadership in this hemisphere.
Most of the Latin American nations
are openly and solidly with us, despite
the Cuban fiasco. The rest will be with
us when we start acting more like the
great world power that we are.
I have not sought here to probe the
many other measures that could be
taken.
I have sought to point out that the
Organization of American States can be
an effective weapon in this cold war with
communism in Cuba.
The Organization of American States
is like a fertile field waiting eagerly the
planting of the seeds of leadership. Let
the United States plant these seeds of
leadership, and reap the harvest of a
strong hemisphere, free from foreign,
Communist domination.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10
minutes to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia [Mr. DON H. CLAUSEN].
(Mr. DON H. CLAUSEN asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. DON H. CLAUSEN. Mr. Speaker,
it is with great sorrow that I join with
my colleagues in bringing attention to
the most serious international problem
facing this Nation. It also is with great
hope that I associate myself with this bi-
partisan group of eminent statesmen-
hope that a solution presented here today
will be accepted and vigorously imple-
mented.
May I say, Mr. Speaker, that I feel the
word "hope" is the key to our dangerous
predicament. By our spectacular failure
to oppose the admission of Hungary's
totalitarian Communist regime into the
United Nations, we snatched hope away
from the oppressed peoples of Eastern
Europe as though the torch of freedom
had suddenly disappeared from the up-
raised hand of Our Lady of New York
Harbor, the Statue of Liberty.
Likewise, this country's obvious accept-
ante of a totalitarian Communist regime
in Cuba, crowned by the extreme meas-
ure of even hampering the operations of
Cuban freedom fighters, has tarnished
the hope held by western European
countries in NATO to say nothing of the
hopes of the Cuban people. To me there
is little wonder that the much maligned
President of France, Charles DeGaulle,
has seen fit to involve his country in uni-
lateral defense preparations. Whether
this attitude is warranted by the facts is
debatable. But the image of the United
States as the great hope for the defense
of freedom-loving peoples has been tar-
nished, and President DeGaulle is under-
standably alarmed,
This great Nation has led the tide for
freedom and self-determination from the
days of our colonial patriots. But now
there are grave doubts in the minds of
free peoples as to whether we are still
leading this cause, whether we still are
waving the banner of hope to those who
are captives behind the Iron Curtain,
whether we have traded total peaceful
victory of freedom in exchange for ap-
peasement of communism as it steadily
takes over the world.
Mr. Speaker, there have been many
proposed solutions to the problem of
Cuba. Some of them tread on dangerous
ground. Others are reasonable economic
and political sanctions that could lead
to gradual, peaceful rejection of com-
munism in this hemisphere. I need not
go into their provisions in detail here,
but I will wholeheartedly pledge. myself
here and now to support and work for
the enactment of any reasonable legis-
lation that will restore the United States,
in the eyes of the world, as the leader of
freedom.
May I call the attention of this hon-
orable body to the list of at least 22
measures aimed at the Cuban situation.
I think that it is pertinent to note at this
point that although this legislation is
authored by our colleagues on both sides
of the aisle, the administration has seen
fit to give them the cold shoulder. For
the sake of brevity, I will summarize their
subject matter very briefly now, but will
place their numbers and description in
the RECORD for the convenience of the
Members.
Monroe Doctrine: House Joint Reso-
lutions 227, 237, and 278 would express
the determination of the United States to
implement the Monroe Doctrine.
Liberation of Cuba: House Joint Reso-
lutions 229, 250, and 310 call for the lib-
eration of Cuba by whatever action nec-
essary and House Concurrent Resolution
22 also calls for release of U.S. citizens
imprisoned in Cuba.
Bay of Pigs: Senate Resolution 54 and
House Concurrent Resolutions 51 and 82
would authorize studies of the Bay of
Pigs invasion.
Economic sanctions: Senate Resolu-
tion 83 asks support for a free world
embargo on Soviet shipments to Cuba;
House Joint Resolution 244 urges the
President to notify recipients of U.S. aid
that general trade with Cuba will result
in termination of such aid; H.R.
2657 and H.R. 3954 would prohibit the
shipment in commerce of articles im-
ported from Cuba; Senate Concurrent
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963
Approve (,R AIJ/0A/ 3o *8[ fffAP383R000200250020-3 12841
to the teeth as an outpost as well as a
staging and resupply area.
Third. This Government should an-
nounce that it Is opposed to Communist
governments in this hemisphere and is
willing to use force if need be to prevent
their establishment.
What about the inspections? Let us be
frank. We know the United Nations will
not order the inspections, so the United
States must be prepared on the basis of
the Monroe Doctrine and our national
security to act outside the United Na-
tions if necessary and to act soon. If
this means Mr. Stevenson's resignation,
that is tough turkey. If this means that
some people are going to say that this
Nation is a big bully and picking on poor
little Cuba, that is tough turkey too. Be-
cause, believe me, this must be done.
But then again, do not take my word for
it. Ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Ask
any military, naval or Strategic Air
Command officer who has thought this
thing through. They are to a man In
favor of inspection of Cuba backed up by
force.
Assuming then that the United States
decides to proceed on its own initiative
and independent of the United Nations,
what course should we take? Inspec-
tion teams of perhaps 12 competent
U.S. specialists composed of a major-
ity of military personnel, but including
civilian and scientific personnel, and
photographic equipment, should be pre-
sented to the Cuban Government with a
demand for the grant of continuing
right to inspect the island of Cuba any
place, any time. And, Mr. Speaker,
again the teeth, because as we all know,
requests in diplomatic language and let-
ters of protest against Soviet shooting
down our aircraft in times past and the
like, do not get anywhere unless there Is
some teeth-this request should specify
a time for the first inspection unit to
arrive in Cuba and indicate explicitly
that if denied permission to inspect we
will commit military, naval, and air
forces of the United States in support
of such an inspection.
Now does this mean war? I do not
believe it does. It may mean for a while
some limited warfare. But it will not
escalate to atomic destruction for one
reason. This is because we have enough
atomic deterrent staring the Commu-
nists in the face to incinerate the Soviet
Union and every Communist country,
even if they made an initial attack. And
as long as this is the case, there will be
no atomic warfare.
However, Mr. Speaker, if we wait, if
we delay for more months and more
years in eliminating this cancer in Cuba,
th
s;t
tior, will only further worsen.
e
u
There will be more Cubans Indoctrinated military ror u n `- There is a way and there is an organi-
in Moscow to hate us. There will be page 2, there must be the further policy The to implement the way.
more subversives planted in Latin and position that the same principle will be zation
South America. There will be more mil- of continuing application against any The Organization of American States
itary equipment on the island of Cuba further or new attempt at Communist is the oldest large organization of na-
and a greater and greater export of it penetration of this hemisphere. tions in the world, long preceding the
along with the Communist propaganda The vast majority of the people of this League of Nations or the United Nations.
leaflets and unrest throughout this Nation would welcome such positive, pro- All nations in the Western Hemisphere
hemisphere. American, pro-national-security deci- are members, save Canada.
We must act and act now. The risk siveness. Such a program is militarily One of its principal aims has been
of limited war is great, but no nation ever defensible. It is of urgent necessity if mutual security for the member nations.
stayed on top nor lived up to its respon- the national security is to be preserved In 1940, at Havana, a resolution of the
sibilities as the champion of freedom against exposure to atomic attack, sub- OAS declared:
and justice that was unwilling to take version, infiltration, guerrilla warfare,
risks, sabotage and espionage throughout the
I have used the phras- "tough turkey" entire hemisphere. Nothing less is com-
several times. I have done this delib- patible with honor, with principle, with
erately, because the Communists that we American tradition, with the Monroe
are up against are, indeed, tough turkeys. Doctrine, with commonsense in aware-
Given the opportunity, presented by the
astonishing spectacle of a rich, fat, ma-
terially comfortable American Govern-
ment unwilling to fight for freedom,
these tough turkeys will take advantage
of every means to build up their military
and propaganda potential. This is not
propaganda for a peaceable change to
a different system. This is not the case of
an ideological conflict. This is not a cold
war in the true sense. It Is hot. It is
real. It is to the death. And Mr. Speak-
er, along with a good many millions of
Americans, I have children and I want
them to be able to start adulthood in a
hemisphere that Is free from commu-
nism. It is said that World War I was
fought to make the world safe for democ-
racy; World War II to preserve the world
from the insane brutalities of Hitler's
fascism. Today, under the umbrella of
atomic stalemate, Communist military
operations are proceeding to destroy our
favorable balance of power because we
have been unwilling to even risk limited
warfare in the defense of freedom.
Are we decadent bourgeois? I won-
der.
No foreign aid programs, no Alliance
for Progress, no economic projects of any
kind to invest strength and stability in
Latin America can possibly be effective
with a continuing Communist Cuba. If
we fail to risk a showdown now to
achieve a free Cuba, we will have to risk
it when the next Latin American nation
falls to communism, only to find us In
a much more vulnerable position.
With the passage of time, this Cuban
situation is not going to get any better.
Khrushchev boasts of some some kind of
commitment that the President made
him in return for having backed off at
the time of the quarantine in October
1962. I understand there are some 40
letters between the American President
and the Soviet dictator at this time. Yet,
in spite of demands by the Congress, the
representatives of the people, this corre-
y
g
g
spondence has never been made public. save apparatus was being built around
Incidentally, neither was F.D.R.'s with Latin Americans trained in Cuba. He
Stalin-not even to this day. said that 1,000 to 1,500 trainees from
The President, in a special address every Latin American country save one,
the Nation and td to the world after ade- went to Cuba in 1962 to receive training
quate consultation with the Secretary of in guerrilla warfare, sabotage and
State, with the Cabinet, with the Na- terrorism.
tional Security Council, and the Joint can be done to transform the
Chiefs of Staff, should announce an What
stop into the action?
American policy of firm insistence upon President's can
a done to words
traffic ? su What
hat
inspection of Cuba and that we will can
f saves between Cuba and Latin America
.,__
by use o
ness of the true nature of communism
and the full meaning of its military of-
fensive operations 90 miles from Florida.
Every hour that passes finds the situa-
tion materially worsening. The Ameri-
can Executive must act, and act now for
God, for country, for our survival, and
for our children's future.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I now yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from Flori-
da [Ml'. GURNEY].
Mr. GURNEY. Mr. Speaker, in March
of this year, 1963, at Costa Rica, Presi-
dent Kennedy made this ringing state-
ment:
We will build a wall around Cuba [not
a wall of mortar or brick or barbed wire but[
a wall of dedicated men determined to pro-
tect their own freedom and sovereignty.
He vowed fierce and unyielding resist-
ance to the spread of foreign tyranny
in the Western Hemisphere.
The Soviet Union through its Cuban pup-
pets absorbed the Cuban nation into its
despotic empire-and it now seeks to extend
its rule to the shores of Continental
America-
Said the President.
At the Organization of American States,
at this meeting and wherever Americans
gather to consult about the future of their
continent, we will continue to strengthen
the structure of resistance to subversion.
These words received by the listening
Latin American Presidents at Costa Rica
with hope and enthusiasm. However,
the hard facts of the cold war and Cuba
tell a different tale about the wall
around Cuba and the spread of tyranny
to Latin America.
Almost exactly a month before about
the same time of the President's speech
to our Latin American neighbors, the Na-
. n' lli enc Chief M. R. McCone,
D ector o t o en ra a n r ence
ne repor a subcommi ee of
the Foreign Affairs Committee of this
House, that a dangerous, wide-spread,
anized Communist subver-
hl
or
and hi
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963
Approved For R &~ $~ %A F5B0
Resolution 31 urges closing the Panama
Canal to shipments of war material to
Cuba; H.R. 2423 and H.R. 2494 would
set the U.S. policy that foreign ves-
sels used in trade with Cuba and certain
other Communist countries may not car-
ry cargoes under U.S. programs; House
Concurrent Resolution 146 proposes that
the United States urge the organization
of American States to impose economic
sanctions against Cuba; House. Joint
Resolution 302 provides for reductions of
future U.S. contributions to certain spe-
cial aid programs of the United Nations
if aid thereunder is given to Cuba.
Cuban refugees: House Concurrent
Resolution 150 would establish a Cuban
National Council as a rallying point for
Cuban refugees and as a legal organiza-
tion with which the United States and
other countries could deal; House Joint
Resolution 318 would create a Commis-
sion on Cuban Refugees to study the
refugee problem and to relocate them
throughout the United States.
Soviet military occupation: House
Resolution 290 asks the Organization of
American States and the United Nations
to join the United States in demanding
Soviet military withdrawal from Cuba.
Mr. Speaker, some of these proposals
may constitute a solution, or an approach
to a solution, to this serious encroach-
ment into the Western Hemisphere. The
solution may be among other proposals
made to this body. Whatever it is, it
must restore this Nation's prestige among
our friends and the respect of our ad-
versaries. It must elevate us again as
the shining example of self-government
for all nations, old and new, to emulate.
And by our own individual example, we
can show the freedom-loving peoples of
the world how to pull themselves up by
their own bootstraps, like many of us
here on this floor have done.
I have anxiously joined with my col-
leagues in this call for action on Cuba,
Mr. Speaker. I am sure your mail shows,
as mine does, that the American public
is concerned with the administration's
lack of policy and lack of action in this
matter. How long can we afford a policy
of inaction and still remain secure?
The hope of freedom-loving people
throughout the world hinges on our pro-
viding the a,swer. It is time to move.
Let us show these friends that Uncle
Sam still possesses a little guts and de-
termination in carrying out our expected
role of leadership.
The following bills have been intro-
duced in the 88th Congress, 1st session
concerning Cuba:
Senate Resolution 54, GOLDWATER:
Authorizes a study of the facts sur-
rounding the Bay of Pigs invasion. Jan-
uary 23, 1963.
House Concurrent Resolution 51, MIN-
SHALL: Authorizes a study of the facts
surrounding the Bay of Pigs invasion.
January 24, 1963.
House Concurrent Resolution 82, MIN-
SHALL: Establishes a special joint com-
mittee to conduct a full and complete
study to determine the facts concerning
the Bay of Pigs invasion. February 5,
1963.
House Concurrent Resolution 22,
PEPPER: Expresses the sense of the Con-
gress with respect to citizens of the
United States now unlawfully im-
prisoned in Cuba and the liberation of.
Cuba from the curse of Castro and com-
munism. January 9, 1963.
Senate Resolution 83, MAGNUSON and
MORSE: Expresses the sense of the Sen.-
ate to support the American merchant
marine's efforts to obtain a free-world
embargo on Soviet shipments to Cuba.
February 6, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 227, CRAMER:
Expresses the determination of the
United States with respect to the situa-
tion in Cuba, to restate and implement
the Monroe Doctrine, and to encourage
adherence to the principles of self-
determination and human freedom.
February 4, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 229, JOHAN-
SEN: Expresses the determination of the
United States with respect to the situa-
tion in Cuba. February 4, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 237, FULTON of
Pennsylvania: Expresses the determi-
nation of the Congress that the United
States maintain, implement and enforce
the Monroe Doctrine throughout the
Western Hemisphere. February 7, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 244, WATSON:
Urges the President of the United States
to advise all nations receiving aid under
the foreign assistance acts that further
commerce by such nations with Cuba
in commodities-humanitarian items
excepted-will result in termination of
such aid. February 7, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 250, WILLIAMS:
Expresses the determination of the
United States with respect to the situa-
tion in Cuba. February 11, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 278, HARSHA:
Expresses the determination of the
United States with respect to the situa-
tion in Cuba, to restate and implement
the Monroe Doctrine and to encourage
adherence to the principles of self-de-
termination and human freedom. Feb-
ruary 25, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 310, WYMAN:
Expresses the determination of the
United States with respect to the situa-
tion in Cuba. March 6, 1963.
House Resolution 290, PEPPER: Calls
upon the Organization of American
States and the United Nations to join
the United States in demanding the So-
viet Union to remove its armed forces
from Cuba. March 11, 1963.
House Concurrent Resolution 150,
WALLHAUSER: Expresses the sense of Con-
gress that the President should provide
for the establishment of a Cuban Na-
tional Council. The Council would first
provide a rallying point for the Cuban
refugees in the Western Hemisphere;
second, provide an effective legal instru-
ment through which the United States
and interested Latin American govern-
ments could offer material and financial
aid, in the fight to regain freedom for
Cuba; third, provide a focal point of
communication with the freedom-loving
fighters still carrying on inside tuba;
fourth, assure the Cuban people and the
world that the United States is not ac-
cepting the Castro government as the
permanent Government of Cuba; and
fifth, lay the legal basis for domestic
support for the activities of the Cuban
refugees. May 8, 1963.
House Joint Resolution 31.8, PEPPER:
Cuban Refugee Commission Act. Estab-
lishes a commission known as the Com-
mission on Cuban Refugees, composed of
the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare, the Secretary of Labor, and the
Secretary of Commerce, to conduct a
program of relocation of the refugees
from Cuba in Florida to other parts of
the United States and to Conduct a study
of this problem. March 11, 1963.
House Concurrent Resolution 116,
ROGEERS of Florida: Expresses the sense
of the Congress that the United States
should propose to the OAS that certain
economic sanctions be taken against the
Communist Government of Cuba. May
2, 1963.
H.R. 2657, DEVINE: Prohibits the
shipment in commerce of articles im-
ported into the United States from Cuba.
January 24, 1.963.
H.R. 3954, HEMPHILL: Prohibits the
shipment in commerce of articles im-
ported from Cuba and prohibits in-
troduction into commerce any article in-
tended for export to Cuba. February 21,
1963.
House Joint Resolution 302, MONTOYA:
Provides for reductions of future United
States contributions to certain special
aid programs of the United Nations if aid
thereunder is furnished to Cuba. March
4, 1963.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 31,
SCOTT: Expresses the sense of Congress
on closing the Panama Canal to ships
carrying war materiel to Cuba. March
14, 1963.
H.R. 2423, PELLY: Declares as the
policy of the United States that foreign
vessels which trade with Cuba or certain
other Communist countries may not par-
ticipate in the carrying of cargoes under
programs of the United States. January
21, 1.963.
H.R. 2494, GARMATZ: Same as IH.R.
2423. January 24, 1963.
H.R. 7687, ROGERS of Florida: Purpose
to close U.S. ports to the ships of any
nation which allows any of its ships to be
used in sea trade with Cuba.
[Mr. BRUCE addressed the House.
His remarks will appear hereafter in the
Appendix.]
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5
minutes to the gentleman from. New
Hampshire [Mr. CLEVELAND].
(Mr. CLEVELAND asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, it is
a_privilege and a pleasure to participate
in this special order. I would like to
commend the gentleman from Virginia
[Mr. MARSH], the gentleman from Penn-
sylvania [Mr. WEAVER], and others who
have arranged this discussion as a bi-
partisan,effort to crystallize thought and
inspire constructive action. My remarks
shall be addressed to but one phase of
this many faceted problem: "The Cuban.
Caves," which, to me, present a good ex-
ample of the necessity of facts in facing
a complicated matter. Facts coupled
with firmness and sound judgment can
go a long way toward solving complex
problems.
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020=3
 1281 Approved F~oru l (~1/ CB P Rg83R000200250020-3 July 29
Last winter when the great debate
was raging as to whether or not the mis-
siles had been removed from Cuba, It
occurred to me it would be wise to find
out if there was any place in Cuba where
missiles could be hidden. On February
28 I called to the attention of the House
a letter I had received from the Library
of Congress in answer to my inquiry con-
cerning the presence of caves in Cuba.
I was surprised to find out that this was
the first direct inquiry that had been
made. I was also surprised to find that
in the Library of Congress there was re-
markably little information about the
presence and size and location of caves
in Cuba. It seemed strange to me then
and it seems strange to me now that in
a situation where we had complete ac-
cess to the caves in Cuba for many.
many years, our intelligence had not
thought to look into such an important
strategic potential which could be used
contrary to the interests of our country.
Again, on March 7 of this year, I called
to the attention of the House that al-
together the Library tV Congress did not
have much information on caves in Cuba.
this apparently had been a matter which
had concerned Army intelligence. Maj.
Gen. Alva R. Fitch, testifying before the
Senate Armed Services Committee, ac-
tually stated there were Indeed innum-
erable caves, in fact. countless thousands
of caves in Cuba. He went on to point
out that they were definitely large
enough and suitable for storing military
weapons. including missiles. He also
revealed that aerial reconnissance in-
dicated roads recently built to known
cave locations.
Mr. Speaker, at that time I called on
the people of this country who might
have knowledge of Cuban caves to send
their information to the Library of Con-
gress. It is interesting to note that as
a result of this, many people indeed did
send the Library of Congress informa-
tion picked up over the years either as
sightseers or archeologists or engineers
working or visiting in Cuba.
Mr. Speaker, on March 11 the gentle-
man from Michigan [Mr. CEDERBERG I In-
serted in the RECORD stories which ap-
peared in the Chicago Tribune and
Manchester Union-Leader, concerning
this matter of Cuban caves and some of
the response which had resulted from my
previous insertions in the RECORD.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, on April 1 of this
year I inserted in the RECORD an editorial
from the Saturday Evening Post on the
secret eaves of Cuba. This editorial
wrapped up information then existing
and pointed out the highly significant
fact it was possible for some caves, front-
ing on the ocean, to contain submarine
pens. There has been additional in-
formation since then which would lead
us to believe this Is so.
Mr. Speaker, when I inserted that edi-
torial from the Saturday Evening Post
I called to the attention of my colleagues
the fact that this information had been
sent to me by my friend, Ambassador
Robert C. Hill, a constituent of mine who
lives in Littleton. N.H. I think it is im-
portant to remember that Ambassador
Hill. when Ambassador to Mexico, was
not fooled by the Castro regime or the
bearded demagog who heads it.
Had the Ambassador's earlier warn-
ings been heeded many of the mistakes
made since, might well have been
avoided.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I should
like to cite a few additional facts which
I think my colleagues should have: as
a result of a recent questionnaire which
I sent to my constituents, I am con-
vinced that most of them are not satis-
fied with this administration's policy
toward Cuba. I am also convinced of
the fact that the American people dis-
miss as unwarranted the suggestion that
those of us who are criticizing present
policies toward Cuba are warmongers
calling for an open invasion of Cuba.
There are many effective measures (and
many of them have been well detailed
here this afternoon) that can and should
be adopted which in no way involve di-
rect military action.
Working much more closely with the
OAS and bringing to bear the full eco-
nomic power at our disposal is certainly
one course of action that has not been
vigorously pursued, and certainly should
be.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from New Iiamp-
shire has expired.
Mr. MARSH. I yield i additional
minute to the gentleman from New
Hampshire.
Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, I
met with Ambassador Hill when he was
here in Washington recently. He indi-
cated that if we employ our full eco-
nomic power and engage in skillful and
concerted action through the OAS, the
Castro regime could be brought to terms
and brought down without the use of
military force.
Mr. Speaker, we hear so often the un-
founded criticism that those of us who
challenge the wisdom of our present
Cuban policy are warmongers calling
for open invasion. We are accused of
spoiling America's international image.
It is becoming increasingly clear that
a lack of firmness, vacillation, and lack
of well-defined and well-prepared policy
is what is really damaging our "image."
Mr. MARSH. I now yield to the
gentleman from Florida [Mr. GIBBONS).
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank
the gentleman from Virginia for yielding
to me. I join with those speakers today
who have taken a bipartisan approach to
this great American problem. This
problem of how to win the minds and
hearts of the people of this world to the
idea of freedom that is best expressed
in our American Revolution.
Mr. Speaker, we are not here in this
Congress to write history or to criticize
history. We are here to try to under-
stand history and to make history. It Is
in this spirit of making history that we
should frame our remarks and continue
our discussions. That is our responsibil-
ity. Let us leave the history writing to
the historians.
To sum up briefly some of the things
we can do short of armed conflict to rid
Cuba of Castroism and communism, let
me say first of all as a broad title we can
cut off trade with Cuba. The gentle-
man from Florida [Mr. RocERs]. and
myself and quite a few others have in-
troduced legislation that would call for
the closing of all American ports to ships
of any country that persist in trading
with Cuba. I think all of us would see
that immediately that would place upon
our friends such as Great Britain who
since the first of this year had 41 ships
visit Cuba, some 13 of which were large
tankers, the choice of whether they, the
British, wanted to trade with us or trade
with the Castro Communists. Of course,
the answer to that would be easy. They
would want to trade with us.
Thereby, we would throw the burden
of supporting Communists upon those
who should support it, their advocates,
the Russians. I believe stretched as the
Russian economy is that throwing this
additional burden upon them of sup-
porting Cuba would in time bring about
the downfall of Cuba.
It would also serve to weaken the
cause of Russian communism. We can
also cut down Cuban trade by inserting
provisions In future legislation that no
country that continues to trade with the
Communists will receive any foreign aid.
We can close the gates of the Panama
Canal to those who persist in trading
with Cuba. We can insist that those
countries who continue to fly airplanes
into Cuba will no longer receive any for-
eign aid and that they no longer be per-
mitted to trade with us. Also we can in
Central and South America expand
our educational and our cultural ex-
change program. We need to do this.
We have been woefully neglectful in this
area.
We can convert the technique and
principles we have developed in selling
our products throughout the world to
selling this idea of freedom by expand-
ing the operations of the USIA and other
programs of this kind. In short, Mr.
Speaker, there are many avenues of ap-
proach to the defeat of Cuban commu-
nism that we can and must follow. It
is the responsibility of this Congress to
make a vigorous start.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield to
the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
WEAVER] for a period not to exceed 15
minutes.
Mr. WEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I thank
the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. Speaker, today we have presented
a coordinated bipartisan congressional
review and recommendations on the cold
war as it applies to Cuba. The problem
has been communism in Cuba in respect
to the Western Hemisphere. We have
sought informally, with individualistic
approaches, solutions so that we might
eliminate communism from Cuba and this
hemisphere.
The review and recommendations
made have included the following basic
points:
First. U.S. action.
Second. Role of the Organization of
American States.
U.S. ACTION
I. Punta del Este Resolution No. 2: It
is apparent that we in the United States
must develop a determined and immedi-
ate liberationist policy to eradicate com-
munism from Cuba. This we must make
evident not only in the United States but
to the people of Latin America. The
Monroe Doctrine has been discussed as
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved For R I tIQ%L: ID3RWW 5B4 00200250020-3
to its reevaluation and application to the
Cuban situation.
One of the more important additional
actions which it is felt could be made is
through reassertion of the Punta del Este
Resolution No. 2. The implementation
of this resolution, developed by the OAS
nations, makes a firm commitment of
American policy in relation to the Sino-
Soviet bloc in Cuba. We feel under this
resolution there is an opportunity for
positive action which will show leader-
ship as well as cooperation to the Latin
American nations.
II. Economic blockade: There is a
growing feeling for an all-out economic
blockade of Cuba in which all U.S. ports
of entry-air and sea-shall be closed to
any nation dealing with the island coun-
try. The closing of the Panama Canal
to Cuba and other countries dealing with
them has been reemphasized. We must,
likewise, persist in asking our western
allies to desist from their dealing with
Castro. A blockade of oil shipments of
all nations to Cuba has been proposed.
III. Foreign aid program: Restrictions
have been proposed on U.S. foreign aid
to countries dealing with Cuba. This
means that congressional foreign aid
amendment swill place restrictions on
monetary, economic, and other forms of
foreign aid to any country which deals
with Castro.
IV. Provisional Cuban Government: It
is evident that we need some means of
coordinated information and action re-
lating to the restoration of Cuba to de-
mocracy. Some feel that the recognition
of a well-balanced and representative
provisional government could be this
focal point for the Cuban people.
Through this organization we can help
develop the principles of our traditional
policy of nonintervention and of self-de-
termination for Cubans and all other
subjugated countries in the Western
Hemisphere. I label Russia an aggres-
sor and a Castro ally. We feel that all
forms of internal revolution could be
aided by such a provisional government
through the development of good will,
creation of military forces, establishment
of a program of sabotage, the setting up
of rebel bases on adjoining islands, and
the formation of a radio free Cuba.
If such a provisional government is set
up it would include not only those in
exile from Cuba but also those in absen-
tia who are leading the attack from with-
in the island. Thusly, we can help to
prepare for the development of a proper
democratic atmosphere for post-Castro
Cuba.
V. Military surveillance: It is essential
that our low-level, U-2, and high-level
plane surveillance continue so that we
can be prepared to meet any threat to our
Nation. We feel the CIA can be more
e osa ylm
proving security maintenance and intel-
ligence information. On-site missile in-
spection policy in Cuba has been advo-
cated. Of additional importance is
psychological warfare aimed at Soviet
and Cuban troops to counteract this type
of cold warfare which the Communists
have used relentlessly.
No. 114-18
VI. Western Hemisphere economic aid
and education programs for underde-
veloped countries: The U.S. cultural
leadership and exchange programs for
Western Hemisphere nations should be
maintained. Students, educators, scien-
tific, and technical personnel should con-
tinue to be exchanged. The development
of democratic educational processes can
be then carried out in these nations. I
personally have been impressed by the
Peace Corps teachers as well as privately
sponsored teachers and their potential in
the education systems of the Western
Hemisphere countries. The great need
for teachers due to the 50-percent illit-
eracy rate in many of the Western Hemi-
sphere countries must be filled by us or
the vacuum will be filled by Communists.
It is apparent that the Alliance for
Progress with its high motives and its
great beginning needs a modification of
its role. It must be reoriented in order to
carry out what is being discussed here.
We must fully utilize communication
medias for this program.
VII. Freedom Academies: Freedom
Academies have been proposed-one in
the United States and the other in Latin
America. These academies can serve the
purpose of preparing leaders and the
people for the psychological impact of
the fourth dimensional warfare we now
face in the cold war.
VIII. Kennedy-Khrushchev corre-
spondence: The correspondence between
President Kennedy and Premier Khru-
shchev during and following the October
confrontation should be published to put
to rest the rumors and misunderstand-
ing in the Western Hemisphere and the
world over the contents of these com-
munications. There have been allega-
tions of a deal having been made over
Cuba.
ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES
Proposals have been made concerning
the OAS. A cooperative embargo could
be placed on shipping and travel to and
from Cuba to prevent exportation of
Communist subversion to the Western
Hemisphere. This would eliminate use
of Little Cayman, Grand Cayman, and
other Caribbean islands for bases in Cas-
tro's scheme of exporting subversion to
other Latin American countries.
The Alliance for Progress must not be
considered as a substitute to direct mili-
tary opposition to communism.
We should support democratic Latin
American States. We should aid exiles
of Communist or neo-Communist states.
We should give a definitive U.S. policy
and leadership to the OAS. We must
show that we have the virility and the
gumption to carry on a decent leader-
ship in cooperation with other nations.
We could urge the OAS to set up a quar-
antine of Cuba similar to that applied to
the Dominican Republic under Trujillo.
We could urge all Latin American na-
tions to break off their relations with
Cuba and withdraw recognition of Cuba.
We feel an OAS task force could be es-
tablished similar to NATO-perhaps a
Latin American Treaty Organization.
This would combine all democratic na-
tions who, like us, have the determina-
tion to keep this continent free from
communism. They could act as a polic-
ing organization in conjunction with the
U.S. forces. This would illustrate to
these nations our willingness to cooper-
ate and be a part of the united effort.
Today, we have also seen a compre-
hensive review of the bills before Con-
gress relating to Cuba. As you will note,
there are many bills. Few have come
before committees or the Congress as a
body. It is time we coordinated the ac-
tions of these bills. It is time that the
legislative branch of Government show
leadership in finding solutions to the
Cuban and cold war problems.
CONCLUSION
Today, a little over 10 years since the
Moncada operation in Cuba, we stand
here as Members of Congress discussing
the cold war in Cuba. We realize that
Communists have a bastion on this is-
land. We feel we can remove commu-
nism from there by means short of armed
intervention by the United States. The
alternatives are not peaceful coexistence
or nuclear war. We have seen the re-
sults of appeasement in the past in the
era of Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo. We
see the threat of such a philosophy now
with British Guiana, Venezuela, Brazil,
all on the threshold of capitulation to
communism.
We recognize that there is risk taking
involved, but the risks will be greater if
we continue to procrastinate in elemi-
nating Castro.
Action on Cuba would not split the
OAS. We feel, rather, it would tend to
unite Latin America behind us as they
have united on other occasions, particu-
larly in the missile crisis of October 1962.
What divides these nations from us is
our own indecision and inaction. This,
in turn, promotes similar indecision and
inaction everywhere in the hemisphere,
leaving a vacuum. Our action on Cuba
should reaffirm to those who are behind
the Communist wall in Latin America
and elsewhere that it is the policy of
nonintervention and self-determination
that we advocate.
The Soviets in Cuba are the interven-
ers. They are the interlopers, the im-
perialists. Our objective is to give the
Cubans an opportunity to express their
own self-determination in national sov-
ereignty, free of foreign domination.
Under international agreements now in
existence, the Rio Treaty of 1947 pro-
vided for collective self-defense. The
Caracas Declaration of 1954 specifically
was directed at Communists and now
Resolution No. 2 of Punta del Este 1962
is our latest and most specific of all. It
carries another step forward to the idea
of collective self-defense contained in
the Rio Treaty. It has been buried
away by officialdom. We urge the ad-
ministration to implement this resolu-
tion.
Finally, speaking from the floor of
Congress, we who are Congressmen from
both sides of the aisle, say to the people
of America that the legislative branch
of Government has not deserted Cuba,
but is actively, deeply interested in the
restoration of Cuba to the democratic
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved F,?1WM"Al/15ZDPRJ83RO00200250020-3k July 29
nations. We from both sides of the aisle
speaking here today likewise say to
those of you behind the Communist cur-
tain of Cuba, you who have suffered, you
who are fighting for democracy and feel
neglected, that we are with you, that we
will do all that we can to see that you
are restored to your rightful place of
self-determination in your Government.
We have not forgotten you. We not
only want a free Cuba but we are deter-
mined to help It become free. We also
say to all the nations of the Western
Hemisphere that Members of the Con-
gress are anxious and eager to develop a
determined coordinated leadership by
the United States. Through such a plan
and policy the United States can join
with you to keep this hemisphere free
from communism.
Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker, as we
draw to a close the special order that has
been devoted to Cuba as well as the
special order that preceded it of the gen-
tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. WEAVER]
I should like to thank those on both sides
of the aisle who participated in this dis-
cussion in order to present a bipartisan
approach to a very serious problem in
the Caribbean that is really only a part
of a larger problem, a worldwide problem
that indicates the scope and thrust of
Soviet aggression and their desire for
world domination through the interna-
tional Communist movement.
I might point out that America has a
brilliant history in the conduct of psy-
chological warfare. In the American
Revolution certainly some of the finest
examples of effective psychological war-
fare operations were waged under the
direction of such men as Thomas Jeffer-
son and Benjamin Franklin. In the
American Revolution the psychological
warfare effort that was aimed at the
members of the Hessian forces that
fought under George III in the colonies
was highly effective in causing desertions
in the Hessian ranks.
It is very vital and necessary that we
undertake a similar psychological war-
fare effort directed at the members of
the Soviet military forces stationed on
the Cuban island. Certainly this Na-
tion that is expert in marketing and in
communication can package and tell the
story of the American Revolution, can
create and foment unrest in the Soviet
ranks and make it extremely difficult for
the warlords of the Kremlin to main-
tain the esprit de corps and the morale
of their forces in the Cuban island. It
is vitally necessary we undertake such an
effort aimed at subversion of the Russian
troops in Cuba themselves. But even
more this effort must also be directed
at. labeling the Soviet Union as being the
real interventionist In Latin American
affairs, in labeling the Soviet Union as
being the first and foremost colonial
power of the twentieth century, and we
must remind the people of Latin Amer-
ica that this colonial power that now
holds Cuba also holds in the Red grip
the satellite nations of Europe, that it is
the Soviet Union that is denying the
right of self-determination to not just
of the citizens of Cuba but indeed from
the citizens of the satellite countries of
Europe, that it is the Soviet Union that
has made Cuba indeed a captive nation.
There are some of the things that we
must undertake, some of the things we
must do in the days and months ahead.
Certainly it is our task and obligation
to be certain that we preserve for our
posterity the blessings of liberty. It is
the obligation of the American citizens
to be certain that the 20th century
does not go by default to the heirs of
Ghengis Khan. It shall be in this decade
that we shall have cast the die of the
image of society. I submit to you that
no die should be cast other than the die
that is in the image of the American
Republic.
Ultimately the price that will be paid
as the price to purchase freedom for
the people who walk the streets of
Havana will be the price Americans are
willing to pay, but I am convinced that
American citizens are willing to pay that
price, that they support the declaration
of October 1962, wherein it was stated
that we are determined to prevent by
whatever means are necessary, including
the use of arms, the Marxist-Leninist
ideas being extended throughout this
hemisphere and so endangering the
liberties of the peoples of the Americas.
We intend to join with freedom-loving
Cubans to support the aspirations of the
Cuban people for self-determination.
The Cuban people are not enjoying this
now because of the nature of the Com-
munist regime which seeks to extend its
slave empire, and seeks to do it by
guerrilla warfare, espionage and sub-
version.
At this point, Mr. Speaker, I would
like to insert in the RECORD a statement
from the Free Cuba News, a publication
of the Citizens Committee for a Free
Cuba dated June 1, 1963, wherein this
very able publication, a very sound and
documented publication, points out the
scope of the guerrilla effort extending
from Cuba into the Latin Americas.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Virginia?
Mr. HAYS. Mr. Speaker, reserving
the right to object, what is this that the
gentleman is going to insert in the REc-
ORD and who prints it?
Mr. MARSH. It is pages 7 and 8 of
the Free Cuba News.
Mr. HAYS. Who is the Free Cuba
News? The CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 18
supposed to be accurate. Have you any
information that this is anything more
than propaganda from a bunch of Cu-
bans who have an ax to grind?
Mr. MARSH. Yes: I am convinced
that it is something more than that.
Its editor is Daniel James, the writer.
There are members of the advisory com-
mittee. such people as Adm. Arleigh
Burke and other distinguished American
citizens. It is simply a newsletter that
is published on events occurring not only
in Cuba but throughout the Latin
American countries.
Mr. HAYS. Further reserving the
right to object, Mr. Speaker, what
bothers me a little bit is how fast people
can get to be experts on this subject
when the military that has devoted a
lot of study to it does not seem to know
all the answers. But some of these out-
siders can in a few weeks get all the
answers once they get on the payroll. I
presume this writer that you are talking
about is on somebody's payroll, and they
can solve all the problems concerning
Cuba and Russia and communism and
what have you, just as long as somebody
is giving them a paycheck. It is a little
more difficult, I would point out to the
gentleman from Virginia, when you are
sitting In the driver's seat to make the
decisions.
I am not going to object to the gen-
tleman's request in this instance, Mr.
Speaker, but I do point to the fact that
there is a good deal of a possibility of
putting things in the RECORD that do not
have much real value and which are not
very authentic. I am a little worried
about putting in things from such or-
ganizations that must have an ax to
grind-or they would not be in existence.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Vir-
ginia?
There was no objection.
The matter referred to is as follows:
[From the Free Cuba News, June 1, 19631
INSIDE LATIN AMERICA
CUBA OFFICIALLY PROMOTING SUBVERSION
Further evidence that the Cuban Govern-
ment Is openly promoting subversion In
Latin America is provided by its delegate to
the Fifth Labor Congress in Prague, which
began May 1, where he told Communist bloc
representatives that the Castro regime was
dedicated to the task of overthrowing the
existing governments of Latin America. The
delegate, Benito Sanchez, declared that Com-
munist Cuba was making an effort princi-
pally "to stimulate support for the people
of Venezuela, Colombia and Nicaragua * *
with the aim of overthrowing the govern-
ments of those countries."
CASTRO CONSPIRACY IN ANDES
Fidel Castro made the boast not long after
taking power in Cuba: "We shall convert
the Cordillera of the Andes into the Sierra
Maestra of South America." Stories of in-
creasing Communist violence In the Andes,
in recent weeks, indicate that the Cuban
Communist dictator is making progress to-
ward realizing his boast.
These Andean republics are feeling increas-
ing Castro-Communist pressure:
Bolivia: This landlocked country at the
"roof of South America," one of the five
Latin republics that maintain diplomatic re-
lations with Cuba, is a center of Communist
arms running, espionage and subversion in
the Andes. The Cuban Embassy in the capi-
tal of La Paz, according to our sources, sup-
plies money and material aid to native and
neighboring Communists. An elaborate
chain of Communist way-stations, beginning
in Chile, has one of its Important termi-
nuses in La Paz.
Chila: The capital of Santiago is reported-
ly the GHQ for Castro-Communist operations
in the Andes. It is said to be headed up by
two veteran Bulgarian Reds, Ivan Tenev and
Ronstantin Telalov, who are reportedly
members of the Central Committee of the
Bulgarian Communist Party.
Tenev and Telalov are said to have set up
a series of Red way-stations stretching into
five neighboring countries: Argentina, Bo-
livia, Brazil, Ecuador and Peru. Arms and
money are funneled through the stations.
Through Africa on the Chilean-Peruvian
border, for example, arms are dispatched
into Peru. The Africa station also connects
up with La Paz, since it borders Bolivia, too.
The Cuban Embassy in Santiago, accord-
ing to the Cuban Student Directorate, has
more staff than its normal requirements call
for and reportedly engages In the illicit arms
tratrc. It recently established a "Chilean-
Cuban Cultural Institute" in Santiago,
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 1963 Approved For OftT ffiffi A3 i -FW63BD0 2000200250020-3 12847
which, is considered a front for other cul-
tural activities.
Peru: The existence of the Communist
chain of stations in the Andes came to light
through a Peruvian colonel, G. C. Victor
Zapata Cesti, who captured several Commu-
nist youths when they attacked Puerto Mal-
donado, in southeast Peru not far from Bra-
zil, on May 20. Col. Zapata Cesti learned
that the attack was part of a Castro-Com-
munist plan to unleash guerrilla warfare,
terror and sabotage upon the area, and to
initiate similar operations against Lima, the
national capital, and the ancient Inca cen-
ter of Cuzco.
The Communist guerrillas captured by
Col. Zapata Cesti were part of a group of 69
young Peruvians who had been to Cuba for
6 months of training in guerrilla war, ter-
rorism and sabotage under the direction of
Maj. Ernesto "Che" Guevara, Castro's guer-
rilla expert. The roundabout way they re-
turned to Peru from Cuba exposed the op-
eration of the Red way-stations.
The youngsters had gone to Havana via
Arica, the Chilean border town, where they
were picked up by Cubana Airlines. They
were sent back, however, not to Arica, Chile,
but Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. From Rio the
group journeyed to Sao Paulo by truck,
thence to Cochabamba, in southern Bolivia,
by train. They then headed for Santa Cruz,
and crossed into Peru through the Beni
jungle. Once in Peru they made their way
to a destination called Aposento Farm, where
they hired a guide to take them through
more jungle and finally on to Puerto Mal-
donado.
The leaders of the youthful Communist
band appear to have come from good social
backgrounds. One, Alain Elias, is the son
of a Peruvian aviation hero, Capt. Renan
Elias, whose family is well-to-do, Another,
Javier Heraud, who was killed, had studied
at the Catholic University of Lima and had
won a prize as Peru's best young poet.
Mr. MARSH. I might point out, Mr.
Speaker, that the insertion is along the
lines of the Seldon subcommittee report
on Cuba, describing it as a base for sub-
version and espionage and as a training
ground for this real threat aimed and
directed at our country and the Latin
American countries.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my col-
leagues who have participated in this
discussion for the contributions they
have made here today.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance
of my time.
CUBA AND THE COLD WAR
(Mr. BATTIN asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and to include
extraneous matter.)
Mr. BATTIN. Mr. Speaker, because
of the work I have done in the past
in collecting and evaluating informa-
tion on the Cuban situation, I am happy
to participate in this discussion.
I have previously made several re-
ports on the Cuban matter and. would
like to include excerpts from these re-
ports. -
On May 20, I spoke on the interim re-
port of the Preparedness Investigating
Subcommittee of the Senate Committee
on the Armed Services. The recently
issued interim report of the Prepared-
ness Investigating Subcommittee of the
Senate Committee on the Armed Services
dealing with the Cuban military buildup
throws light on hitherto obscure aspects
of the Cuban situation during the sum-
mer and fall of 1962. Consequently, this
unanimous report of a subcommittee
composed of four Democrats and three
Republicans is an important first step
toward better understanding of the
background of American policy during
that crucial period. Its appraisal of
past errors and present dangers sounds
an emphatic warning to those respon-
sible for formulating policy toward Cuba.
Perhaps the most valuable part of the
subcommittee's report is the enumera-
tion of 11 considerations that lead it to
conclude that Cuba now represents a
grave threat to our national security.
This is a needed antidote to the plethora
of statements from official and unofficial
spokesmen of the administration de-
signed to minimize, and divert attention
from, the seriousness of the Cuban
problem.
We hope that these words of the sub-
committee's report-again the unani-
mous judgment of its members-will be
heard throualiout the land:
The matter of basic and fundamental im-
portance * * * and the source of the real
threat, is that international communism now
has a firm foothold in this hemisphere and
that, if we permit it to do so, it is here to
stay.
By (a) process of erosion our neighbors to
the south may fall nation by nation until
the entire hemisphere is lost and the Com-
munist goal of isolating the United States
has been attained.
In a report dated June 16, I reviewed
the history and implications of the
Monroe Doctrine and urged a return to
the positive policies of that doctrine:
Three years ago Khrushchev told the world
that the Monroe Doctrine was dead, saying
"the remains of this doctrine should be
buried as every dead body is, so that it does
not poison the air by its decay." The Eisen-
hower administration replied, "the principles
of the Monroe Doctrine are as valid today as
they were in 1823 when the doctrine was pro-
claimed." The Kennedy administration has
so far failed to contradict Khrushchev either
by word or by deed.
What is needed is the positive policy of
the Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine
is being violated by the presence of Soviet
troops in Cuba-whatever their strength,
whatever the nature of their equipment.
The doctrine Is being violated as long as
there is any type of Soviet intervention in
Cuba,
The removal of Soviet troops and the
elimination of other types of Soviet inter-
vention in Cuba is an urgent policy objective.
The ultimate objective of U.S. policy must
be the elimination of the Communist regime
in Cuba and its replacement by a government
freely chosen by the Cuban people.
In another report of July 19, I listed
nations now receiving U.S. economic
and/or military assistance and still
carrying on trade with Cuba:
In late September 1962, the administration
announced that a four-point program of
restrictions on free world ships involved in
the Cuban trade would shortly be put in
effect. The announcement was made after
months of official indecision during which
the volume of free world shipping to Cuba
increased drastically and freed Communist
ships for the transportation of military
equipment to Castro. The administration
noted on October 2, 1962, that two-thirds
of the ships going to Cuba were free world
ships.
The announcement that a four-point pro-
gram of restrictions would be imposed was
late. The restrictions proposed were in ade-
quate. And down to the present day this
announcement has remained an idle threat.
The only restriction on free world ships
so far imposed by the Government has been
the totally ineffective ban on the transpor-
tation of Government-financed cargoes from
United States ports on ships in the Cuban
trade.
Finally, the administration has spurned
the weapon placed in its hands by Public
Law 87-872, the Foreign Aid Appropriations
Act of 1963, which contains two restrictions
which are being ignored.
The act flatly banned any United States
aid to a "country which permits any ships
under its registry to carry to Cuba petro-
leum" and certain other goods of a military
or strategic character.
Tankers of the following free nations
which are receiving aid from the United
States have traveled to Cuba in the first
6 months of 1963: United Kingdom, Greece,
Italy, and Norway.
Further, the act prohibited economic aid
"to any country which sells, furnishes, or
permits any ships under its registry to carry
items of economic assistance to Cuba, un-
less the President determines that the with-
holding of such assistance would be contrary
to the national interest and reports such
determination to the Foreign Relations and
Appropriations Committees of the Senate
and the Foreign Affairs and Appropriations
Committees of the House of Representa-
tives."
Economic aid is being furnished by the
United States to countries apparently in
violation of this provision of the law. In-
quiry made of the staff of the.Foreign Affairs
and Appropriations Committees of the House
of Representatives discloses that the Presi-
dent has not submitted to these committees
the required certification.
A substantial volume of trade between
Cuba and the free world continues. The
most recent reliable figures, covering the
calendar year 1962, place it at $250 million or
20 percent of the entire foreign trade of Cuba.
If goods for military use from the Communist
bloc were eliminated from the totals, free
world trade would constitute a significantly
higher percentage of Cuban foreign trade.
The Government of the United States
should pursue the following immediate ob-
jectives in its economic campaign against
Communist Cuba:
1. Cessation of the use of free world ships
to transport goods to and from Cuba.
2. Reduction of free world trade with Cuba
to a negligible amount.
3. Curtailment of trade between Cuban
and the Communist bloc and/or increase
of the economic cost to the Communist
world of supporting Castro.
The Government of the United States
should take the action necessary to bring to a
complete halt within the next 30 days the use
of any free world ship to transport goods to
or from Cuba. Such action is long overdue.
Denial of free world shipping to Castro would
deprive him of approximately 50 percent of
the vessels that now sustain his faltering
economy.
And last week, I and several of my col-
leagues addressed the following letter to
the President in a further effort to im-
press those concerned with the serious-
ness of the Cuban matter of free world
trade with Cuba.
The PRESIDENT,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: The undersigned
Members of the House of Representatives re-
spectfully urge that you take speedy action to
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 12848 Approved F grr, Le gN?4(,' /,0tkr( tBDP-6 QQ3B3R000200250020-3 -July 29
bring to an end the use of free world ships the saddest and most fumbling oration of shown a degree of cruelty-of brutishnes3, of
in trade with Cuba. his career. contempt for the most basic norms of justice
We are shocked to find that as much as 50 The phrases of honeyed adulation he used and humanity-that has never before been
percent of the goods that sustain the econ- to describe Premier Khrushchev were worthy experienced by the Cuban people.
omy of Communist Cuba are carried is ves- of an Ulbrlcht-after all, the Soviet leader Above all, these people have this to lament:
sels flying the flags of free nations. In the was the man who first installed and then The July 26 Movement, in the 10 years since
first quarter of 1963 between one-third and removed missiles in Cuba, in both instances its bloody setback at the Moncada Barracks,
40 percent of the oil that was delivered to treating the Island as a satrap. On eco- has managed-not without the help of
Cuba was brought there on free world nomic matters, Castro rebuffed with annoy- stupidities in our own country-to betray
tankers. ance all specific questions from his servile Cuba into becoming a captive of the Kremlin,
The announced objective of your admini- press panel. World sugar prices have risen which maintains about 20,000 troops and
stration is the isolation of the Communist over the levels paid by the Soviet Union, technicians on the island. The place thus is
regime in Cuba. This objective is being yet incredibly, Castro said "it was not cor- a Soviet satellite and a dangerous one. As
thwarted by the use of vessels under the con- rect" to bring the matter up with the Rus- such, Itconstitutes not only a thorn in the
trot of nations which are our friends and sians. What would he have said to any American side (or a bone in the throat, as
allies. The effect of such measures as nave Cuban who held out a hat rather than Mr. Khrushchev would say), but also a de-
been taken to put pressure on the Cuban bargain with the United States on sugar pressing symbol of how inadequate our coun-
enonomy by the United States is to a con- prices? try can be in anticipating, evaluating and
siderable degree nullified by this shipping. In one passage, he remarked: "At this heading off just such threats as Castroism.
It should be possible to end this traffic time. It can be said that the general situa- Thus, is a bleak anniversary that we mark.
within the next 30 days. Since the prob- tion of our country is one of security-a After a decade of existence, the Castro tyran-
lem is largely one of persuading two na- situation of security. Security against the ny is worse than ever, and apparently more
tions, the -United Kingdom and Greece, to danger which has been besetting us since entrenched. If any bells are to be rung to
withdraw their vessels from Cuban trade, a the very outset of the revolution-of a direct mark the birthday, they should give out the
firm request by the United States should invasion by the United States." sound of a tocsin for all the Americas.
suffice. If a request is not enough, we would With this admission, Castro knocked the
favor closing the ports of this country to ideological prop from his totalitarian state. TEN YEARS AFTER MONCADA
all vessels of any nation which permits any The prisons have been filled, neighborhood by Citizens Committee fa Free
of its ships to carry goods to or from Cuba, spy systems set up, newspaper freedom (Cuba, nt In Washington, Committee for
directly or indirectly. smothered, elections denied and Cubans
May we further invite your attention to mercilessly shot-all on the pretext that an Ten years ago today, Fidel Castro led ap-
section 107 of Public Law 87-872. the Foreign invasion was imminent. If Cuba is secure, proximately 100 young Cubans in an attack
Aid Appropriations Act of 1963. In con- why must a Soviet garrison remain on the on Moncada barracks, in eastern Orient
formity with this section, Mr. Joseph W. island? Why does Castro shift his military Province. In what turned out to be a futile
Reap of the State Department informed the commands so nervously and keep weapons attempt to overthrow the dictatorship of Gen.
press on January 11 of this year that "aid and ammunition locked up from his militia? Fulgencio Batista. From that day on, July
shall be cut off to countries whose ships carry Why did he appoint, last week, an Eastern 26 became a symbol of freedom for the Cuban
goods to Cuba." No action of the type European Communist. Fablo Grobart, as people, and the July 26 revolutionary move-
promised by Mr. Reap has been taken. chief of operations of the rebel army? ment which was founded 2 years later be-
You can be sure you will have the support In the decade since July 28, 1953, much came the vehicle through which they hoped
of the overwhelming majority of the Mem- has happened which can never be undone, to win their freedom.
hers of the Congress in effective steps to It would be a cruel caricature of history to Now, a decade later, July 26 has gone down
terminate the use of free world ships In suggest that Castro was always a villain and in Cuban annals as a day of infamy, and the
Cuban trade. this country always the spotless lamb. movement named after it has been cruelly
Yours respectfully, Castro now talks about reconciliation. But destroyed by its very founder and inspirer,
JAMES F. BATTIN, WILLIAM C- CRAMER, E. the first requisite is a demonstration that Fidel Castro. Today, the Cuban people, in-
Ross ADAIR, JOHN M. AsHBROOK, ED- he really speaks for his people and that stead of being free are enslaved by a despot-
WARD J. DERWINSKI, SAMUEL L. DEVINE. his regime is not pinned together with lam worse than Batista's, and the chief au-
DURWARD G. HALL, CLARK MACGREGOR, Soviet bayonets. Asa beginning, why doesn't thor of their enslavement is the same Castro
GARNER E. SHRIVER, Members of Con- he grant his own people some of the freedom who launched the Moncada attack avowedly
h
em.
gress. he so solemnly promised in years gone by? to free t
in the speech he made at his trial follow-
lFn,ul the Washington (D.C.) Evening Star.
Me,"
CUBA AND THE COLD WAR der er the e title of "History jor requirements
July 25, 19631 Castro laid down eight major requirements
(Mr. WEAVER (at the request of Mr. BLEAK ANNIVERSARY for a free Cuban society. They included the
STAFFORD) was granted permission to ex- The betrayal began just 10 years ago to- necessity for holding free elections, a free
tend his remarks at this point and to morrow, and it began as a failure. A young press, individual freedom (the right of habeas
include extraneous matter.) man-a crypto-Communist named Fidel Cas- corpus), the restoration of the democratic
Mr. WEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I include tro-headed a group of equaly young "revolu- 1940 constitution (which Batista had set
the following material on Cuba' tionaries" in an attack on the Moncada Bar- aside), an end to rule by force and violence,
racks in Santiago de Cuba. The attack, an end to despotism, the exercise of self-de-
[From the Washington Post, July 26, 1963 ) aimed at overthrowing the regime of Fulgen- termination, and the practice of true national
DARK DECADE cio Batista. was as unbelievably mismanaged sovereignty.
It is a suggestive coincidence that the as the so-called military operation that oc- Castro in power has failed to fulfill a single
10th anniversary of Fidel Castro's rebellion curved a long time later at a placed called one of his own requirements as a revolu-
comes in the same week that the United Na- the Bay of Pigs. tionary. On the contrary, he has utterly
tions is in pitched debate over colonialism. Yet, despite its having been a fiasco costing i egated them and has imposed upon his un-
On July 26. 1953, when Castro led the abor- scores of lives, the Moncada operation-car- happy country the most cruel and sanguinary
live attack on a military barracks that gave ried out on July 26, 1953-was seized upon by dictatorship the Americas have ever seen.
his movement its name, the assault was in Fidelistas as as inspirational event. Out of It Only a few days ago, the date of Cuba's in-
part prompted by nationalist Ideals. Cubans came the "July 26 Movement," under which dependence. May 20, 1902-equivalent to our
resented their Island's semicolonial status the Cuban people were led In due course to Fourth of July-was eradicated from Cuban
based on sheer proximity to the United where they are today-in the Iron grip of a history by Government decree.
States. a one-crop economy and a tradition Communist dictatorship. This is a depostism At his trial, Castro said: "Cuba should be
of Yankee paternalism. far worse than Battsta's. which, whatever its the bulwark of liberty and not the shameful
That form of indirect colonialism has end- vices, had the undeniable virtue of being abode of despotism."
t:d, but what has taken Its place? Ernesto anti-Red, pro-West, and highly sympatico He added this ringing statement: "We were
Betancourt, once Castro's July 26 repre- With the United States. born in a free country willed to us by our
:Tentative in Washington, points out else- It is interesting that Batista spared Fidel's fathers. The island will first sink into the
where on this page that the very terms used life after the Moncada adventure. Certainly sea before we will consent to be the slaves
by the Afro-Asians to arraign Portugal can the situation In Cuba and the Western Hemi- of anyone."
be applied to Cuba today. No longer the sphere would he better today, less tense, hap- But Cuba is today a bulwark of despotism
insolent rebel, Castro has become an apolo- pier, had Batista's regime dealt as harshly and Cubans the slaves of a foreign power.
gist for a foreign capital, and his people with Castro and his revolutionaries as those If Castro meant what he said in 1953, let him
the exposed hostage of a distant country. revolutionaries have dealt with Cubans who free Cuba from the domination of Soviet
This new relationship was made humiliat- have sought to maintain their freedom. The imperialism and its colonial arm, the Cuban
ingly clear in Castro's June 6 report In Hs- Fidelistas, In any case, with their drumhead Communist Party. If he is a true patriot,
vane on his trip to Moscow--quite possibly courts and their countless executions, have he will address himself at once to the over-
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 79 3 Approved For F ~BNA ' j 3RL) 5BH0[TS~_00200250020-3 12849
riding task of expelling from his country
the foreign armed forces that now occupy it.
Let him also fulfill the pledges he made at
his trial to fight for the holding of free elec-
tions, for establishment of a free press, and
for defending all the rights of free Individ-
uals including the right to own property and
the right to habeas corpus and trial by jury.
Let him restore the democratic Constitution
of 1940 which sanctified those and other
rights, and upheld, in particular, the right
of the Cuban worker to be free and to orga-
nize into trade unions of this own choosing
headed by democratically elected leaders.
Let Castro end the rule of terror which he
once asked Batista to end, and which has
claimed many thousands of lives and warped
the minds and souls of a whole generation of
Cubans. Let him end the despotism of the
Communist police state he has imposed upon
his people. Above all, let him permit the
Cuban people to exercise their self-determi-
nation and national sovereignty, by expelling
all Soviet and other foreign Communist
armed forces and technicians from Cuba, and
then prepare the way for truly free elections
under the conditions he himself proposed
during the Moncada trial.
If Castro lacks the courage and conviction
to carry out his revolutionary ideals, let
those of his followers who still believe in
them join in a concerted struggle to do so.
Let the old fighters of the July 26 move-
ment now wage war against the worst tyr-
anny Cuba has ever known.
The Citizens Committee for a Free Cuba
calls attention to the fact that Cuba, under
Castro, is a bristling fortress that menaces
her Caribbean neighbors as well as the
Cuban people themselves. Nearly 300,000
Cubans are today under arms, led by an
estimated 30-40,000 Russians and other for-
eign Communists in Cuba as soldiers or
military "technicians," notwithstanding
Castro's many exhortations against "mili-
tarism" in the years before he took power.
In those years, he called for the "reor-
ganization of the armed forces and the sepa-
ration of same from political and partisan
activities, so that the armed forces may
never again be instruments of any caudillo
(fuehrer) or political rarties" (Aug. 20,
1958). But the Cuban armed forces today
are the servant of the Communist caudillo,
Castro, and of a foreign political party.
Today, these forces are employed inter-
nally to suppress the rebellious people of
Cuba. But tomorrow, they may be exported
to overwhelm weaker Latin countries in
revolutionary warfare.
Castro justifies the militarization of Cuba
on the grounds that he must defend him-
self against Cuban exile plots. But one
must ask, why are there exiles in the first
place? Let the Castro of the Moncada pe-
riod answer:
"Those tens of thousands of families away
from Cuba constitute a grave accusation
against the bad -governments that the re-
public has had to tolerate. We say that
the problem of Cuba will be solved when
the exiles can return."
How much graver is the accusation against
Castro himself when one considers that, at
the latest estimate, some 350,000 Cubans
have had to flee their country because of
his tyranny. Another 230,000 Cubans have
passports and visa waivers, but lack trans-
portation. Still another 385,000 are trying
to get their immigration papers into shape.
The flight of Cubans since Castro took power
has no parallel in the history of the Western
Hemisphere.
To add to the misery of the Cuban people
under Castro, an estimated 7,000 of them
have been executed by firing squads alone
since he came to power, and at least 3,000
more have been killed- in battle against his
forces. Probably many thousands more have
died in silent engagements with the secret
police, the armed forces, and perhaps also
the Russian occupation army. Another
80,000 to 100,000 languish in prisons and
concentration camps and have doubtless
given up their quota of dead to the all-con-
suming dictatorship.
On this 10th anniversary of the Moncada
attempt, it is well to know that the full
story of it has yet to be told and that au-
thorities are still trying to piece it together
and unravel the tangled skein that continues
to obscure much of Fidel Castro's past.
Castro has always said publicly that he
launched the Moncada attack to overthrow
Batista. But there are those who contend
that, rather, Castro knew in advance it
would fail and deliberately intended to sac-
rifice lives-those of others, not his own or
his brother's-in an effort to lift himself
from obscurity to the national spotlight.
The famous Cuban historian and onetime
University of Havana professor, Dr. Herminio
Portell Vila, relates that Castro told him just
before the Moncada attempt that If it In-
volved producing a few muertecitos-"little
corpses"-to obtain recognition of his lead-
ership in the anti-Batista struggle, so be it.
Neither Castro nor his younger brother Raul
intended to be among the muertecitos, con-
tinues Dr. Portell Vila, because they had
planned not to be in the line of fire during
the attack. They took precautions, he points
out, not out of cowardice but for coldly cal-
culated political reasons.
In August 1955, Fidel Castro founded the
July 26 revolutionary movement, and used
it as the means to attain power. Although
its public Image was that of an amorphous,
democratic movement composed chiefly of
young students, professionals, and members
of the middle class, inside it there func-
tioned a tiny, secret group of Communists
and Communist sympathizers who exercised
iron control. That group was headed by the
Castro brothers and Ernesto "Che" Guevara,
the Argentine Communist who is now Cuba's
Minister of Industry. Not long after taking
power, the Castro-Guevara group began sys-
tematically destroying the July 26 movement,
and today it is no more; it has been sup-
planted by the official United Party of the
Socialist Revolution, the formal name of
Cuba's Communist Party.
Today is a day of mourning in Cuba, when
it should have been a day of happiness. But
the Cuban people have known before, during
times of struggle against other tyrannies,
how to conquer adversity, and the day is
not distant when that traditionally freedom-
loving people will cast out their new oppres-
sors and install a truly free government on
their island once and for all.
The Citizens Committee for a Free Cuba
calls upon all Americans to do everything
possible to enable the Cuban people to win
their freedom. For the cause of a free Cuba
is, in the last analysis, the cause of a free
America.
DR, POSSONY DEMOLISHES THE
OVERKILL ARGUMENT
(Mr. HOSMER (at the request of Mr.
STAFFORD) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point and to in-
clude extraneous matter.)
Mr. HOSMER. Mr. Speaker, on June
17 the American Security Council's
Washington Report carried a remark-
ably perceptive article by Dr. Stefan T.
Possony which breaks directly on our
military security, particularly in light of
the proposed partial test ban treaty.
The article is as follows:
OVERKILL SOPHISTRY
(By Dr. Stefan T. Possony)
Among the gibberish which nowadays
passes forstrategic nomenclature, the word
"overkill" had made a remarkable career.
Originally, this term meant that too much
nuclear yield was assigned to a specific tar-
get. The problem was never considered to
be too significant: If the target were a city,
the whole city was aimed at anyway, and
the surplus yield would have been absorbed
by the town's uninhabited environs. Simi-
larly, if the target were an isolated mili-
tary installation, the surplus yield would do
no harm. Hence, "overkill" can result in
unintended casualties only if there were an
attempt to destroy specific targets within
cities. If the yield placed upon an urban
oil refinery, for example, were too large, the
surrounding population would be killed.
With present types of nuclear weapons, a
strategy of selective bombing does not seem
feasible. In the future, discriminating
weapons might change the situation, and
clean weapons, of all yields, would consider-
ably reduce casualties resulting from fall-
out. Yet nuclear progress Is being ham-
pered by the very people who are worrying
about "overkill."
Recently, Seymour Melman, of Columbia
University, presented a strategic overkill
argument. On the basis of remarkable
arithmetic, Mr. Melman thinks that almost
$23 billion can be cut from the present de-
fense budget without impairing present
capabilities: Procurement would be reduced
from 16. to 10 billion; research, development
and tests would be cut by 97 percent; atomic
energy by 69 percent; and military construc-
tion, civil defense, and military assistance
would be eliminated entirely. With about
3,400 delivery vehicles carrying about 22,000
megatons, the United States- allegedly can
"overkill" the Sino-Soviet bloc by 500 times,
and the Soviet Union by 1,250 times. Our
global overkill capability is 125 times, sup-
posedly. How come? There are 2,000 cities
with a population of over 100,000 each and
a total population of 600 million including
370 cities in the bloc and 140 cities in the
Soviet Union. At Hiroshima 100,000 persons
were killed by a 20-kiloton weapon. If 30
percent of the U.S. delivery means fail to
reach their targets, we would drop 2.5 mega-
ton on each slice of 100,000 urban people.
Thus, since only 20 kilotons are required to
wipe them out, we would "overkill" these
target populations by 125 times; similar
arithmetic "discloses" our overkill capabili-
ties against the Communists.
It is not explained whether the "over-
kill" makes any difference to the casualties.
Whether a soldier is killed by a bullet or a
16 Inch "overkill" shell, hardly is a cause of
worry. Reducing the average yield from 2.5
megatons to 20 kilotons, far from saving
anything, would be quite expensive. To
preserve adequate assurance of hit, as yield
is being reduced, the number of shots would
have to be increased. For example, against
a 5 PSI target and with an accuracy of
3,000 feet CEP, 4 missiles with 20-kiloton
warheads would have to be launched to
achieve full assurance of destruction, or 2
missiles to achieve a probability of 92 per-
cent. With a 2-megaton warhead, just one
missile is needed. But let us disregard such
vexing "details."
This much is certainly true. If 3,400 weap-
ons with a yield of several megatons each
were dropped on the surprised and unpro-
tected populations of every city, millions of
people would be killed. But what strategy
would be directed toward ticking off one
town after the other a-round the globe or even
in enemy countries? It Is ridiculous to cal-
culate military requirements in this fashion.
If we had applied this sort of calculation to
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Approved FoC~ie`tiITGRESSIO AL I ECORDDP6,51IOLJSE 8000200250020-3 sTul 9
estimate how much ammunition we needed
to win World War II. someone could have
deduced that not more than 200,000 tons of
steel were required.
According to Mr. Melman's sources, the
United States has 1,300 strategic bombers,
1.150 Navy bombers, and 940 strategic mis-
siles. The Soviet Union has 200 long range
and 1,400 medium range bombers, 85 ICBM's
700 MRBM's, and 100-200 submarine-
launched missiles. Weapons of a more tac-
tical nature were Ignored. Naturally, the
Soviet Union hardly will risk a war with the
United States, so long as they can threaten
us merely with 85 Initial ICBM's and 200
bombers. Since Europe according to this
battle order, rates 700 MRBM's, it would
secem self-evident that the United States
must rate about 1.000 ICBM's; but let us
assume that the Soviets prepare for us only
300 ICBM's. For the United States to be able
to use strategic bombers which carry the
main punch, defense suppression Is manda-
tory. Suppose there are in the Soviet Union
about 750 ground-to-air and antimissile
rocket sites; add to those 300 ICBM's. 700
MRBM's and perhaps 100 airbases; this totals
1.850 targets. If those targets were moder-
ately hardened (30 psi. on the average (. and
if they are to be destroyed by alrbursts. then
two shots with 2 megaton warheads would
have to be used against each target to de-
stroy it with a probability of 90 percent; 3
shots would give a probability of 97 percent.
If we decide to attack the ICBM and MRBM
sites with two weapons each and the other
targets with one weapon, the requirement
would be 2,850 weapons on target or 3.700
weapons on the pad.
However, according to Mr. Melman. we
possess but 940 missiles. This would allow
us to place only about 650 missiles on target.
just enough to take care of the Soviet
ICBM's and of about 50 defense suppression
targets. Certainly, some aircraft might
break through without benefit of previous
defense suppression. But so long as the
Soviet ground-to-air missiles are not knocked
out, these bombers would find It difficult to
demolish Soviet cities systematically. Even
if they were successful, In the Interim Europe
would have been struck by 700 MRBM's.
If the Soviets strike the first blow, their
stipulated 300 ICBM's might knock out 150
American ICBM's. Disregarding the damage
done in the United States by the Soviet
strike, we could then send about 400 ICBM's
against a mixture of defense suppression
targets and alrbases. Paradoxically, In this
situation our aircraft would have somewhat
greater freedom of operations than In the
first strike case. But we still would possess
precious little power to do anything about
the 700-odd MRBM's which could hold vir-
tually all European cities as hostages; and
we would not have too much punch to pre-
vent the Soviet army from seizing Western
Europe. Certainly, our tactical nuclear
forces might enter Into the breach. but the
overall situation would be much worse if the
Soviets were to acquire effective antimissile
defenses, as they undoubtedly will. In brief.
our forces do not have, in any shape, form.
or manner, an overkill capability. On the
contrary, the best that can be said about our
present uosture is that it leaves Europe (and
Japan j unprotected.
Continuous research and development and
procurement are hardly needed to add to our
"overkill" capability. Granted that 22,000
megatons is a great deal of firepower (actu-
ally, Professor !delman overlooked that air-
planes if they can "live" In the hostile en-
vironment, are capable of more than a single
mission(. But such a figure standing by it-
self. is meaningless. How hard are the tar-
gets? How effective are the means of delly-
ery and defense? What Is the accuracy of
delivery and how good is the target intelli-
gence? How many of the targets are fixed or
mobile? And so on. With 22,000 megatons,
no less than 100.000 towns could be "Hlro-
shimized," if we had the requisite delivery
system; but the same firepower, if It can be
delivered according to target specifications.
Is just about enough to take care of 1,000
missile sites,
Continuous procurement Is needed to
equip our forces with new weapons, not to
Increase our firepower. The B--47's which, In
Mr. Melman's calculations, account for 6,000
megatons are being phased out. There Is
no replacement for the B-52 which is credited
with a 12,000 megaton punch. Simple arith-
metic shows that If we want to maintain our
lrepower. while replacing bombers by Min-
uteman, we must substitute about 18.000
Minuteman missiles for the B-47's and
B-52s. Since we are not planning to do
this. our kill capability is being reduced.
Continuing research and development and
procurement also are mandatory, to achieve
antimissile defense capabilities, and to en-
able our forces In Europe, as well as our allies,
to acquire offensive and defensive weapons in
order to balance the Soviet MRBM and me-
dium bomber threat. Unless our weapons
are modernized constantly, we will lose our
military power and the "overkill" capability
will be owned by the enemy exclusively.
Our difficulty Is not that we possess an imagi-
nary overkill capability but that In the face
of the growing Soviet threat, our military
strengths and deterrent powers are declining.
Let us hope, to paraphrase Burke, that the
bophisters and calculators will not extln-
gu(sh the glory of America and Europe.
'.lir. BERRY tat the request of Mr.
STAFFORD) .was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point and to
include extraneous matter.)
(Mr. BERRY'S remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.)
IMIARCH BY COLORED CITIZENS ON
CAPITOL HILL, AUGUST 28
1Mr. SILER (at the request of Mr.
STAFFORD) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point and to in-
clude extraneous matter.)
Mr. SILER. Mr. Speaker, it is quite
generally understood that a large dele-
gation, about 100,000 people, I believe,
consisting of our colored citizens, will
march to the Capitol on August 28 in the
interest of civil rights legislation.
Now about the time when this plan
was first announced one of our Demo-
cratic Senators stated publicly that if
such a delegation should come to his of-
fice, he, the Senator, would himself
phy!ically and personally eject them
from his office.
Having lived among colored people all
lily life and having helped them and
served them on many occasions, I want
to say that none of them will be ejected
from my office or mistreated in any way
whatsoever. On the contrary, they will
be most welcome and will receive my per-
sonal greetings as well as my utmost
respect. Of course, I hope some of these
visitors will be from my own congres-
sional district or at least from my State
of Kentucky. But regardless of where
they may live, they will be treated with
real courtesy, kindness, and civility, I
will plan to meet the situation in this
specific manner:
First. I will have coffee and doughnuts
served to my colored guests.
Second. If any of them are here with-
out means for a night's lodging, I will
offer to pay for lodging for my guests.
Third. If my guests have a minister
among them, I will call on him for a
prayer for our Nation and all of its peo-
ple of all races and creeds.
Fourth. If my guests have some sing-
ers among them, I will call on them for
some spirituals or sonic other good songs.
1 guarantee you that we will have such
a good time together that they will all
have cause to say "this is about the
whitest white man we have been with
for some time."
Yet, Mr. Speaker, I must in all fair-
ness to you and to my prospective guests
say right now that I will not vote for
any civil rights bill that undertakes to
consider every private business out on
the main streets of America as some sort
of an interstate commerce enterprise or
that undertakes to make Bobby Kennedy
the policeman of our entire Nation with
power to run the private affairs of John
Q. Public while the latter is operatijlg
his own establishment. Such a bill
would not encompass freedom, nor
Americanism nor the best interests of
our country. So, while I promise to our
colored friends on August 28 warm hos-
pitality, yet I do not promise them the
unconstitutionality of a bill that may
come before us in the House of Repre-
sentatives as now proposed by Bobby
Kennedy.
TEST BAN TREATY
(Mr. UTT (at the request of M1'. STAF-
FORD) was granted permission to extend
his remarks at this point and to include
extraneous matter.)
Mr. UTT. Mr. Speaker, under unani-
mous consent to extend my remarks in
the body of the RECORD, I wish to include
my current Washington report on the
subject of the pending nuclear test ban
treaty.
WASHINGTON REPORT
(By Congressman JAMES B. Urr)
The U.S. Senate will soon be debating the
ratification of the nuclear test ban treaty.
Adoption of this treaty by the United States
would be one of the most dangerous steps
it has ever taken.
It seems paradoxical than an apparent
step toward peace lays the groundwork for
nuclear destruction of the American people.
Our citizens have been conditioned by mas-
sive propaganda to believe that a test ban
treaty is the only alternative to annihila-
tion. With this conditioning, they are then
supposed to urge their Senators to adopt this
treaty. The American public has been pre-
vented from knowing the truth by reason
of highly managed news based on three er-
roneous concepts: First, the subject is too
secret to trust you with; second it is too
complex for you to understand: and third,
it is too incredible for you to believe.
Russia has violated 51 of its 53 treaties,
and why should we believe that it has any
Intention to keeping this treaty? The
leopard has not changed its spots. Khru-
shchev still Intends to bury us. The open
conflict between Russia and Red China is
being used to persuade America that the
"Butcher of Budapest" Is really a good guy.
The break with China is simply over whether
or not America should be destroyed before
dinner or after dinner. The end result is
the same. International communism has
developed Into a German-Panzer type of
Approved For Release 2006/01/03 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200250020-3
 Ap zwovegr
020-3
E FI I M
UNCLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL SECRET
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
TO
NAME AND ADDRESS
DATE
INITIALS
Mr. Elder 7D5617
7'30
2
3
4
5
6
ACTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
_
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
Remarks :
Attached is an excerpt from the
Congressional Record of yesterday containing
an extensive discussion on the floor of the
House on the subject of Cuba. References
to the Agency and the Director have been
marked and paper clipped.
Assistant Legislative Counsel
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
FROM: NAME. ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
DATE
Assistant Le islative Coun L1~ 7
Releasp 3 : CIA-F ~5P6 ~bb3
3
3RKObb6b0 0
UNCLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL
SECRET
STAT
020-3
FORM 10 237 Use previous editions