Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 16, 2016
Document Release Date: 
June 9, 2005
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
December 10, 1974
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4.pdf3.21 MB
} ~~1123t Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 December 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE there is hereby authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $10,000,000.? (3) For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of subsection (b) of section 19, there, is hereby authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $500,000. (4) For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of subsection (b) of section 14, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $5,500,000. (5) There is hereby authorized to be ap- propriated annually not to exceed $500,000 for-the expenses of the Commission. (6) There is hereby authorized to be ap- propriated notto exceed $500,000 for the services and expenses of the Mediator and the assistants and. consultants retained by him: Provided, That, any contrary provision of law notwithstanding, until such time as funds are appropriated and made available pursuant to this authorization, the Director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service is authorized to provide for the serv- other appropriated funds availabl to him and to reimburse such appropriati s when funds are appropriated pursuant t this au- thorizatiori, such reimbursement t e cred- ited to appropriations currently vailable (b) The funds appropriated p>]uant to the authorizations provided in thinct shall SEC. 26. Section 10 of the Act e led "An Act to promote the rehabIlitati of the Navajo and Hopi Tribes of I~.idi and a better utilization of the resour of the Navajo and Hopi Indian Reserva ns, and for other purposes", approved Apr 9, 1950 (64 Stat. 47; 25 U.S.C. 640) is repea d effec- ?tive close of business December 31, 74. Amend the title so as to read: n Act to provide for final settlement of e con- flicting rights and interests of the pi and Navajo 'Tribes to and in lands lyin within the joint use area of the reservatio estab- lished by the Executive ' order of ember 16, 1882, and lands lying within the nerva- tion created by the Act of June 14, 1 4, and Mr. MEEDS (during the reading). ? Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the Senate amend- ments be dispensed with and that they be printed in the RECORD. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Wash- ington? There was no objection. The Senate amendments were con- curred in. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. GENERAL LEAVE Mr. MEEDS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan- imous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to re- vise and extend their remarks on the legislation just considered. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Washington? Mr. HOSMER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I shall not ob- ject, will the gentleman himself extend in the RECORD an explanation of these amendments? Mr. MEEDS. I will. Mr. HOSMER. Mr. Speaker, I with- draw my reservation of objection. The SPEAKER. Is there abjection to the request of the gentleman from Wash- ington? There was no objection. PERSONAL EXPLANATION Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, I wish to state that I was not allowed to record my vote on H.R. 5385, the Surface Trans- portation Act of 1974. I placed my card in the appropriate box, and my name was not recorded as voting at the time. PERMISSION FOR COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS TO FILE A RE- PORT ON H.R. 17597, EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION Mr. ULLMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Ways and Means may have until mid- night tonight to file a report on the bill H.R. 17597, to provide a program of emergency unemployment compensa- tion, along with any separate, dissent- the request of the gentleman from Oregon? There was no objection. FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. MURPHY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1468 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- lows: Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall he in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 1774) to-amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and for other purposes. After gen- eral debate, which shall be confined to the bill and shall continue not to exceed two hours, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority mem- ber of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the bill shall be read for amendment under the five-minute rule by titles instead of by sec- tions. At the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall.rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amend- ments thereto to final passage without inter- vening motion except one motion to re- commit. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. MURPHY) is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. MURPHY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. QUILLEN), pend- ing which I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. MURPHY of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and ex- tend his remarks.) Mr. MURPHY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1468 provides for an open rule with 2 hours of general debate on H.R. 17234, a bill to amend the For- eign Assistance Act of 1961. House Reso- lution 1468 provides that the bill shall be read for amendment by titles instead of by sections. H.R. 17234 states the sense of Con- gress that no aid should be given to any nation in the Middle East which denies its citizens the right to emigrate. It ear- marks $100 million in military grant aid for Israel; $250 million each in security H 11529 supporting assistance to Israel and Egypt; and $200 million in military credit sales to Israel. H.R. 17234 repeals the $15.0 million ceiling on U.S. military aid and credit sales to Latin America, but it retains the present $40 million ceiling for Africa while adding Presidential authority to waive the limitation. H.R. 17234 also limits economic and military assistance to India in fiscal year 1975 to $50 million. It also establishes a prohibition on further military assist- ance or sales to Turkey until the Presi- dent certifies to the Congress that a "substantial good faith effort" is being made by Turkey toward achieving a settlement on Cyprus. Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of' House Resolution 1468 in order that we may discuss, debate, and pass H.R. 17234. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from. Tennessee (Mr. QUILLEN). (Mr. QUILLEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. MURPHY) has ably explained the provisions of the resolution. This is the Foreign Assistance Act. Whatever our view on foreign aid might be, I see no reason for not debating the bill on the floor of the House, Mr. Speaker, and I urge the adoption of the resolution so we can get down to debate on the foreign assistance bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. MURPHY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I have no request for time. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous ques- tion on the resolution. The previous question was ordered. The SPEAKER. The question is on the resolution. The question was taken, and the Speaker announced that the ayes ap- peared to have it. Mr. HOSMER.. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is not present. The Sergeant at Arms will notify ab- sent Members. The vote was taken by electronic de- vice, and there were-yeas 322, nays 58, not voting 54, as follows: [Roll No. 667] YEAS-322 Abdnor Blatnik Burton, Phillip Abzug Boggs Butler Adams Boland Carter Addabbo Bolling Casey, Tex. Alexander Bowen Cederberg Anderson, Ill. Brademes Chamberlain Andrews, Bray Chappell N.Iink. Breaux Chisholm Annunzio Breckinridge Clark Archer Brooks Clausen, Arends Broomfield Don H, Armstrong Brotzman Clay Ashley Brown, Calif. Cleveland Aspin Broyhill, N.C. Cohen Badillo Broyhill, Va. Collier Baker Buchanan Collins, Ill. Beard Burgener Conable Bell Burke, Calif. Conte Bergland Burke, Fla. Conyers Biaggi Burke, Mass. Corman Biester Burleson, Tex. Cotter Bingham Burlison, Mo. Coughlin Blackburn Burton, John Crane Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 1-111530 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE December 10, 19.7/ Cronin Kazen Roncalio, Wyo. Culver Kemp Rooney, Pa. Daniel, Dan Ketchum Rose Daniel, Robert King Rosenthal W., Jr. Kluczynski Rostenkowski Daniels, Koch Roush Dominick V. Kyros Roy Danielson Lagomaraino Roybal Davis. Ga. Latta Ruppe lie la Garza Leggett Ruth Delaney Lehman Ryan Dellenback , Lent St Germain Dennis Litton Sandman Derwinski Long, La. Sarasin Devine Long, Md. Sarbanes Dickinson Lujan Satterfield Diggs McClory Scherle Dingell McCloskey Schroeder Donahue McCormack Sebellus Downing McEwen Seiberling Drinan McKay Shoup Duncan McKinney Shriver Eckhardt Madigan Edwards, Ala. Mahon Edwards, Calif. Mallary Eilberg Mann Erlenborn Martin, NO. Fsch Mateunaga 'vans, Colo. Mayne Fascell Mazzola Findley Meeds Fish Melcher Flood Metcalfe Flowers Mezvinsky Shuster Sikes Sisk Skubitz Slack Smith, Iowa Smith, N.Y. Staggers Stanton, J. William Stanton, James V. Stark Foley Michel Steele Forsythe Minish Steelman Fountain Mink Steiger, Wis. Fraser Mitchell, Md. Stokes Frclinghuysen Mitchell, N.Y. Stratton Frenzel Mizell Stubblefield Froehlich Moakley Studds Fulton. Mollohan Sullivan Fuqua Moorhead, Symington Gibbons Gilman Gonzalez Goodling Green, Oreg. Green, Pa. Grover Gubser Girds Guyer Hamilton Hammer- Calif. Talcott Moorhead, Pa. Taylor, N.O. Morgan_ Teague Mosher Thompson, N.J. Moss Thomson, Wis. Murphy, Ill. Towell, Nev. Murtha Treen Myers s Udall Natcher Ullman Nedzi Van Deerlin Nelsen. Vander Veen Nix Vanik Obey Veysey cchmidt O'Brien Waggonner Hartley O'Neill Waldle Hanrahan Owens Walsh Hansen, Idaho Parris Wampler Harrington Patman Ware Hastings Patten Whalen Hawkins Pepper White Hechler, W. Va. Perkins Whitehur5t Heinz Pettis Widnall Helstoski Peyser Wiggins Hillis Pickle Williams Hinshaw Powell. Ohio Wilson, Bob Hogan Price, Ill. Wilson, Holt Price, Tex. Charles, Tex. Holtzman Pritchard Winn Horton Quie Wolff Hosmer Quillen Wright Hudnut Raileback Wyatt Hungate Randall Hunt Rangel Hutchinson Rees Ichord Regula Johnson, Calif. Reuss Johnson, Colo. Rhodes Johnson, Pa. Riegle W.ydler Yates Yatron Young, Alaska Young, Ga. Young, Ill. Young, S.C. Jones, Ala. Rinaldo Young, Tex. Jones, Okla. Roberts Zablocki Jones, Tenn. Robinson, Vs. Zion Jordan. Robison; N.Y. Zwe ch Karth Rodino Kastenmeier Roe NAYS-58 Anderson, Dent Martin, Nebr. Calif. Dorn 'Mathis, Ga, Andrews, N.C. Flynt Miller Ashbrook Frey- Montgomery Bafalls Gayd.os Nichols Bauman Bennett Bevill Brinkley Byron Camp Cochran Collins, Tex. Conlan Davis, S.C. Davis, Wis. Denholm Ginn Pike Gross Poage Gunter Ranch Haley Rogers Hansen, Wash. Rousselot Harsha Runnela Henderson Shipley Huber Snyder Landgrebe Spence Land SL d rum Stuckey Whitten Wylie Symms Wilson, Young, Fla. Thone Charles H., Vigorito Calif. NOT VOTING-54 Barrett Griffiths Milford Brasco Hanna Mills Brown, Mich. Hays Manahan, Ohio Brown, Ohio Hebert Murphy. N.Y. Carey, N.Y. Heckler, Mass. O'Hara Carney, Ohio Hicks Passman Clancy Hollfleld Podell Clawson, Del Howard Pneyet Dellums Jarman Reid Dulski Jones, N.O. Roncallo, N.Y. Eshleman Kuykendaii Rooney, N.Y. Evans, Tenn. Luken Schneebell Fisher McDade Taylor, Mo. Ford McFall Thornton Giaimo McSpadden Tiernan Goldwater Macdonald Traxler Grasso Maraziti Vander Jagt Gray Mathias, Calif. Wyman So the resolution was agreed to. The Clerk announced the following pairs: Mr. Hays with Mr. Dulski. Mr. Hebert with Mr. Fisher. Mr, Murphy of New York With Mrs. Grasso, Mr. Ford with Mrs. Griffiths. Mr. Rooney of New York with Mr. Hanna, Mr.. Giairno with Mr. Holifield. Mr, Howard with Mr. Clancy. Mr. Jarman with Mr, Luken. Mr. Macdonald with Mr. Brown of Ohio., Mr. McFall with Mr. KuykendalL- Mr. Evins of Tennessee with Mr. Brown. of Michigan. Mr. Carney of Ohio with Mr. Goldwater,. Mr. Barrett with Mr. Del Clawson. Mr. Dellunis with Mr. Gray. Mr.. Passrnan with Mr. Eshleman.. Mr. Hicks with Mr. Maraziti. Mr. Jones of North Carolina with Mr. Mathias of California. Mr. McDade with Mr. McSpadden. Mr, Milford with W. Mills. Mr. O'Hara with Mr. Minshall of- Ohio. Mrs. Heckler of Massachusetts with Mr. Reid. Mr. Preyer with Mr. R,onoallo of New York. Mr. Thornton with Mr. Schneebeli. Mr. Traxler with Mr. Taylor of Missouri. Mr. Vander Jagt with Mr. T1.ernan. Mr. Carey of New York with Mr. Wyman. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Mr. MORGAN. M:r. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 17234) to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and for other purposes. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. MURTHA). The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Penn- sylvania. The motion was agreed to. IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WBGLE Accordingly the House resolved Itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the con- sideration of the bill H.R. :L7234, with Mr. PRICE of Illinois in the chair. The Clerk read the title of the bill. By unanimous consent, the: first read- ing of the bill was dispensed, with. The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. MOR- (;AN) will be recognized for 1. hour, and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. FRELI)?IGHUYSEN) will be recognized for 1 hour. ' Lott Stelger,asrls, The Chair recognizes the gentleman ommended a bill authorizing $2,643,300,- MecouApproved For Release 2005%616~? : ( A- !~=0095i01 fU6 o lal security-mili?- Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. MORGAN asked and was given permission to revise. and extend his re- marks.) Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, now that the second session of the 93d Con- gress is drawing to a close, we once again turn our attention to a program which has been an important part of our foreign policy for the past quarter of a century. We all know it as the foreign aid pro- gram. During the past 11 months, this body has considered more than 1,500 bills and resolutions. Most-nearly alI-of those measures have dealt with our national defense and economy-with programs important to the security and well-being of our peo- ple. We have debated and voted on bills relating to our domestic employment and unemployment-health and education-- transportation--social security-veter- ans benefits-and- many other subjects. Those programs directly affect the lives of 213 million American people. They account for 98 percent of our $300 billion national budget. They deserve--and have received- our first attention, Now, however, the time has come to look again beyond our borders---at the larger world in which our country must survive and prosper. It is a world which Is. very troubled today-and. which faces more difficult problems than we Americans do. It is a world in which peace and se- curity are still very elusive-and in which violence, and danger of war, are always present. And it is a world which is suffer- ing from massive inflation-high unem- ployment-and widespread starvation. Before this year is finished, thousands more will die of hunger-and many mil- lions will greet the new year with empty stomachs-and little or no hope of ever earning a decent livelihood. The United States is a part of that larger world. We exist in it-and we cannot divorce ourselves from it. As the oil crisis has shown, our se- curity and our economic progress are - affected by it. And so is our national spirit-the spirit which has made us a great Na- tion-and made us try to bring peace and better life to those who need our help. Mr. Chairman, the bill which we will debate this afternoon is Important to our relations with the world outside our borders. It is also important to the future of our own country. ,Our committee has spent more than 5 months working on this bill. We have heard many witnesses.-Prom the Government and from the private sector-and we have spent a long time marking it up. In the end, we have cut $609,400,000 from the President's request-and rec- Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Iecember 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE tary sales-and development assistance programs in fiscal 1975. Briefly, the major provisions of H.R. 1,7234 are as follows: THE MIDDLE EAST Title I, the "Middle East peace pack- age," is probably the most urgent portion of the bill. Action on it is required to support efforts being made to prevent another Arab-Israeli conflict which could bring about a new oil embargo and threaten world peace. Specifically, the Middle East package provides $550 million for Israel; $250 million for Egypt; $202 million for Jor- dan; and $100 million for a special re- quirements fund. These figures include economic aid, military assistance, and . military sales credits. In recommending these amounts, our committee modified the Executive request -in these respects: First, we reduced the $300 million pro- gramed for Israel for military sales by $100 million, and provided that same amount in the form of grant military aid; The committee also increased security supporting assistance for Israel raising the total amount of aid authorized for that country $200 million above the Executive request. Second, we earmarked $6 million of the special requirements funds for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency which cares for the Palestinian refugees, to help off- set a part of its deficit; Third, we prohibited the use of the fund for the financing of any nuclear plants for Egypt or Israel; And, finally, we reaffirmed the sense of the Congress about withholding aid from countries which do not allow their citizens the right of emigration. Mr. Chairman, in the opinion of the President and of the Secretary of State, this "Middle East peace package" Is necessary to keep some measure of sta- bility in that area, and to get the parties concerned moving on reconstruction projects. I want to add that there is no program under this title for any assistance to Arab oil exporters. INDOCHINA AID For the countries of Indochina, the committee recommends $573,400,000 for fiscal year 1975-a cut of $366,400,000 in the administration's request. The committee has given this part of the foreign aid program very close atten- tion and recommended a sharp reduction of nearly 40 percent below the Executive request. While we believe that the Executive's request was too high, the committee agreed that a reasonable level of aid was justified. The funds authorized here will help reconstruction efforts and refugee pro- grams in South Vietnam, Laos and- hopefully-enable Cambodia to survive until it can work out a peace settlement. In the past, Congress has been critical of the President's authority to transfer foreign aid funds from one program to another. Our bill limits aid to South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia to the authority provided in title U. The President would be permitted to use other foreign aid funds in Indochina only by using a waiver which would be subject to a concurrent resolution veto by Congress. The committee also approved an amendment which would shift military aid to South Vietnam from the DOD budget to the foreign aid authorization for fiscal year 1976. DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE The bill also provides $226,700,000 for development assistance and other inter- national economic aid programs-a re- duction from the administration's re- quest of about $63 million. As Members may recall, last year's for- eign aid bill contained a fundamental re- form in the U.S. aid program. The purpose of that reform was to stop aid programs which could be better handled by the private sector and inter- national institutions-and to direct U.S. development assistance toward the poor majority in the developing countries. As the World Food Conference in Rome recently underlined, the most desperate need in this area is for food aid. Therefore, the committee recommends that the bulk of the development assist- ance funds-over $180 million-be used to help the poorest countries to increase their food production. In a related area, the committee cut the contingency fund by $25 million and prohibited the use of-those funds to pay for gifts to foregin government officials; $15 million of the $25 million cut from the contingency fund is earmarked for emergency famine and disaster relief. WORLDWIDE SECUEITY ASSISTANCE In the area of worldwide security as- sistance-other than the funds pro- gramed for the Middle East and Indo- china-the bill provides $427 million for grant military aid, $175 million for mili- tary sales, and $7.5 million for support- ing assistance. The committee cut these categories of aid by $190 million. This part of the bill also places ceil- ings on military aid to Korea and to Chile and prohibits military aid to Tur- key until that country makes a "good faith" effort to reach a peaceful settle- ment on Cyprus. OTHER PROVISIONS Finally, Mr. Chairman, the committee approved several provisions which .strengthen congressional control over foreign aid spending and give Congress improved oversight of our foreign policy in general. Among those are arrr8ndments which: Give the Congress veto power-by con- current resolution-over any transfer of development funds to military aid; Limit economic and military assistance, to India to $50 million in fiscal year 1975; and For the first time, put strong restric- tions on the use of the Central Intelli- gence Agency for operations in foreign countries which go beyond collection of Intelligence. These are the major provisions of the bill before you. The Foreign Affairs Com- mittee approved this legislation by a voice vote and the Individual provisions H 11531 which were voted in were passed by bi- partisan majorities. Mr. Chairman, as the first speaker on this bill, I will be the first to admit that the bill is not perfect-and that it in- volves a large outlay of money. At the same time, I would like my colleagues to remember that most of this money will be spent right here in the United States-creating jobs-and pay- ing for the products of our factories and of our farmers. I would also urge my colleagues to con- sider these three points: First, that peace is a lot cheaper than war. This applies especially to the Middle East package which accounts for more than 40 percent of the funds in this bill. Second, that while we are still provid- ing a lot of aid to Asia, our expenditures in that region have gone down by more than 90 percent in recent years-and will go down even further if peace prevails in Indochina. And, finally, that most of the develop- ment money in this bill will go to fight starvation and hunger-by helping the less developed countries Increase their production of food, and manage their population growth. I cannot see how we-the strongest and the largest consuming nation in the world--can deny them this help. Mr. Chairman, I realize that. our do- mestic: situation puts many of us under heavy pressure to vote against this bill. I hope, however, that we will not do this. I hope that, instead, the House will take a long-range view of what is really in the interest of our Nation and sup- port this legislation. With all of its Imperfections-and the bill certainly does not satisfy everyone here-this is the best bill that our com- mittee could produce this year. And it is clearly in our national inter- est. I urge that the bill be approved. Mr. BENITEZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MORGAN. I yield to the Delegate from Puerto Rico. Mr. BENITEZ. I thank the gentleman from yielding. I wish to refer to section 34 of the bill entitled "Involvement of Puerto Rico In the Caribbean Development Bank." I should. like to say to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania, as I understand it, the purpose of this section Is. threefold: First, to clear up all possible questions concerning the propriety of the Com- monwealth of Puerto Rico if it so chooses to apply for and become in its own right a member of the Caribbean Development Bank. This objective is covered by the authorizing language in section A. Second, the bill intends to make it per- fectly clear that whatever commitments Puerto Rico makes are to be made and to be accepted on the basis of Puerto Rico's own responsibility and will not In- volve in any way any legal or other re- sponsibility on the part of the U.S. Gov- ernment. This is covered In section B. Third, the bill also wishes to makO clear that the United States is not at- Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 11 11532 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD'=HOUSE December 10, 1974 tempting to use Puerto Rico as a sort of left-handed way of withdrawing funds contributed by U.S. banks. Section C endeavors to make this objective clear. The government of Puerto Rico agrees fully with these reservations and has no interest whatsoever in taking advantage in any way of its special and fruitful re- lationship with the United States in deal- ing with its neighbors in the Caribbean region. Given the overall purpose as well as the basic coincidence of views as to the desirability of participation, it would in- deed be unfortunate if the language used to provide safeguards and to clarify pur- poses were to be misinterpreted and twisted around so as to negate those very objectives we jointly wish to achieve. For instance, some of this lan- guage and some of the committee report language might be misread to imply that Puerto Rico is to be precluded from par- ticipating in policymaking discussions when moneys which contain, in whole or in part, U.S. funds are involved, and since moneys coming from the United States would not be kept in separate ac- counts, but would form part of a general fund, such interpretation might result in negating any participation on fiscal mat- ters. Under such terms, Puerto Rico would be handicapped to such an extent as to make it useless to participate in such enterprises. Now, therefore, I wish to ask the dis- tinguished floor manager of this bill what is the correct interpretation to be at- tached to these provisions. Mr. MORGAN. I am glad to clarify the issues raised. Our intention is to facili- tate Puerto Rico's participation in the activities of the Caribbean Development Bank. We think such participation will be good for the Bank, good for Puerto Rico, and good for the United States. We think there must be a full understanding between Puerto Rico and the State De- partment. We appreciate that once there is such general understanding with the State Department, and once Puerto Rico enters the Caribbean Development Bank, then Puerto Rico must operate on its own. It is not to be regarded by any- one as an agent of the United States but exclusively as its own agent. Further- more, we think it is to everybody's ad- vantage that no scintilla of suspicion exists anywhere as to the intention of Puerto Rico or of the United States that Federal funds are not to be diverted to- ward Puerto Rico via the Caribbean De- velopment Bank. We wish Puerto Rico the best of success. Does this answer the gentleman's ques- tion? Mr. BENITEZ. Yes it does, thank you very much. Given these clarifications, I wish to state that we fully support tho Proposed section 34. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MORGAN. I yield to the gentle- man from Iowa. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, the gen- tleman thinks this is not a perfect bill and I find myself in solemn agreement with him on that score. But I wonder why we do not have something at least approaching a perfect bill. Today is De- cember 10, and I believe we convened on January :20 of this year. Is it because there has been a great deal of foot drag- ging and in-and-out consideration of this bill for the reason that it bestows an- other $2.6 billion or $2.7 billion on as- sorted foreigners around the world? Or has the administration not been sure that the votes are available to pass this bill? What is the reason that we get it at this late date? Mr. MORGAN. The gentleman is a very distinguished member of the Com- mittee on Foreign Affairs. He works hard and he attended the hearings. Of course, he knows the bill did not come up from downtown until the middle of May. Since then we have had recesses in the sum- mer, in August, also over Memorial Day and the Fourth of July. We had long hearings and we were 5 weeks in the markup. Now that we have moved Into open sessions on the markups, they are much longer, as the gentleman knows, because the Members like to perform in front of an audience, so the markup took a longer time. We finally finished the markup and got the bill out of the com- mittee by a voice vote just 2 days before we went home for, the election recess. Then, of course, we came back and I went to the Rules Committee and we got a rule. It was not a matter of delib- erate delays but hard work of the coma- mittee and the many complex issues which arose during the past 6 months. The gentleman knows that as a, member of the committee. Mr. GROSS. Is it here now because we are approaching the Christmas season and this Government would like to tell the rest of the world that it has a nice $2.6 billion or $2.7 billion Christmas present for them? Mr. MORGAN. They might have that feeling. It has never been my purpose to give out Christmas presents around Christmas with other than my own money. I like to spend my own money when I give Christmas presents. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MORGAN. I yield to the gentle- man from Colorado. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, what is the rationale behind giving India any military money? Mr. MORGAN. It is not military money. This is economic aid solely. There is no military money for India. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. The limi- tation is set at $50 million for economic and military aidIs the gentleman tell- ing us there is no military aid? Mr. MORGAN. It is all economic aid. The President requested $75 million and there were some amendments offered in the committee to eliminate it all, but it finally was reduced to $50 million, but it is economic aid. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado.. I thank the gentleman for that assurance. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield further? Mr. MORGAN. I yield to the gentle- man from Iowa,, Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, the dis- cussion in the committee centered around fertilizer; did it not? Mr. MORGAN. Not for India but for South Vietnam, Mr. GROSS. No, for India. Mr. MORGAN. As far as I know I do not think there is any fertilizer for India. But there could be some since the $50 million is intended primarily to help them increase food production. Mr. GROSS. I thought that was $75 million, reduced to $50 million now in the bill, for fertilizer for India? Mr. MORGAN. I think it is mostly for grain and other food production. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chair- man, will the gentleman yield further? Mr. MORGAN. I yield to the gentle- man from Colorado. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chair- man, would the gentleman explain how much increase the committee voted for Israel over what the administration re- quested and why? Mr. MORGAN. I am not the author of the Israel aid amendments. I am not sure any of the Members present in the Chamber were. Israel never received any military grant in assistance except at the end of last year, after the Yom Kippur war, when the Congress provided $2.2 billion in military aid-part of it on grant basis at the discretion of the President. The fiscal year 1975 program called for $300 million in military sales and $50 million in supporting assistance. Many Members felt they should have some grant assistance and that is the reason the $100 million in sales was changed to $100 million in grant assistance. Other Members thought the supporting assist- ance for Israel was too small and they wanted some balance in the allocations between Israel, Jordan, and Egypt-and there was. an amendment offered to in- crease the supporting assistance au- thorization. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Did that total about $2.2 billion? Mr. MORGAN. $250 million. The $2.2 billion was approved last year, right after the Yom Kippur war, to preserve some balance in the Middle East. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. On page 24 there is $3.28 billion. Does that mean they are behind in that amount? Mr. MORGAN. No. I think they are pretty well up on their payments. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. What does that current account deficit mean? Mr. MORGAN. What page is that on? Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. The top of page 24, Israel's current account deficit. It says it is expected to exceed $3.28 billion by the end of 1974. Mr. MORGAN. That is their trade- export and import account for the year. That is the country's current deficit. Mr. WOLFF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MORGAN. I yield to the gentle- man from New York. Mr. WOLFF. That is the result of the $2.2 billion that was given to Israel in the supplementary appropriation and, as I understand, It is not the current Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Beeember 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL, RECORD -HOUSE amount, but it is the amount flowing from the United States overall. Mr.. JOHNSON of Colorado. That is not in arrears, that is just the total deficit they owe. Mr. WOLFF. Yes. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. We are talking about the humanitarian aid in this bill. It Is a $2.2 billion bill and the way I add it up we get only $250 million for humanitarian aid and the rest goes for military sales; is that it? Mr. MORGAN. There is $1,486 million in the bill for various types of economic assistance, $405 million for military sales, and $745 million for military aid. Large part of the economic aid-disaster aid, refugee aid, postwar reconstruction in Indochina and the Middle East, and food aid--can be classified as humanitarian aid. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I yield myself 10 minutes. Mr. Chairman, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentle- man from Pennsylvania (Mr. MORGAN) has already indicated why this bill (H.R. 17234) is important. I agree whole- heartedly with what he said. At the out- set of my own remarks, I should like to pay tribute to the gentleman from Penn- sylvania (Mr. MORGAN). He- has been a good chairman and he has guided us through many difficult situations with considerable skill. . After 22 years of participation in the deliberations of this body, I would like to pay tribute to a man who have taken re- sponsibility and handled It well. I would like to rise here today also-for the last time-in defense of foreign aid and in support of this bill (H.R. 17234). In that connection, I should like to read a letter which I received from the President of the United States yesterday. I shall ask permission when we go into the House to have the entire letter in- serted. It begins as follows: Tim WHrrz HOUSE, Washington, December 9, 1974. Hon. PETER H. B. FRELINGHUYSEN, U.S, House of Representatives, Washington, D.G. PEAR PETER: Recently,. I completed my first visit abroad as President of the United States. In my talks with the leaders of each country visited, I was again impressed with the vital responsibility which the United States carries- for building peace in the world and with the need for a strong, active American diplomacy to achieve this objec- tive. It is clear that the continuity and strength of our political, economic, and social policies depends upon our purposeful and wise involvement in the international com- munity. More than that, it is clear to me that we must fashion a role of leadership-in our own interest and that of others=If the po- sibilities for conflict between nations are not to preempt the possibilities of cooperation. In dealing with the urgent needs of our world-security needs, economic needs, emergency relief, development needs-we have a proven and highly flexible tool, namely foreign assistance. More than any other device, it can help to shape peaceful relationships in a world still plagued by hostilities, social unrest, critical shortages and turmoil. United states assistance is iden- tified with humanitarian goals, with oom- monality of security interests and with the moral obligation of our democracy to support the political and economic interests of many of the world's peoples. Foreign assistance can be a means of as- suring not only stability but also progress. In both cases it can help assure peace. We risk much in reducing or restricting foreign assistance. We risk the moderation of our adversaries and the self-reliance of our friends. We risk a world which others shape to their own liking and to the possible detri- ment of our interests. . Two areas illustrate our dilemma and our opportunity very clearly: the Middle East and Southeast Asia. . In both areas our assistance programs sup- port our peacemaking role.- In both our aid will help keep alive the hope for negotiation. In both our aid will contribute to the secu- rity of countries whose needs are great and friendship firm. In both our past commit- ments are being tested in the eyes of a world which is gauging our reliability for the fu- ture. In both we are looking not just for a temporary truce but for reassuring social and economic progress. In a broader context, nothing has demon- strated our interdependence with other countries and their reliance on American leadership and cooperation more than the shortages we are facing in food and energy. For many countries, without the help of our foreign assistance programs, there would be starvation and sickness. We must not neglect the needs of the very poor. We must not ignore the victims of famine and disasters. We must not slow the building of institutions of development in which cooperation-rather than rivalry-can spur planning and development. This does not mean that we can be ex- travagant; quite the opposite is true. We must measure the resources which we apply -to the attainment of foreign policy and na- tional security objectives with the greatest care. We mzast not be generous at the expense of our own economy, or our critical domestic programs. But we must have legislation which will provide adequate resources to in- sure that United States interests abroad are protected, and which will also provide the President with sufficient flexibility to use those resources to the best advantage for America. To tie the hands of the President in countering unforeseen circumstances or in dealing with emergencies would thwart the Constitution we are all sworn to uphold. I believe a continuing battle between the Executive and the Legislative Branches over the direction of our efforts in foreign policy and national security would be very detri- mental to the national good. We must again look at our role as Americans, and work together to solve the problems that threaten our interests throughout the world and at home. I know we share a deep concern for the protection of our national interests and our national security, and working closely to- gether we can provide the tools in the For- eign Assistance Act to meet the challenges we face throughout the world. I wanted you to have these thoughts as you prepare to consider this year's foreign add authorization. I hope that I can count on your support and that of your colleagues in moving toward early enactment of this most vital piece of legislation. Sincerely, JERRY FORD. This is an important bill, indeed, In my opinion an essential one. I agree with the chairman of our com- mittee that H.R. 17234 is by no means a perfect bill; it contains many provisions and -restrictions which I personally feel are objectionable and unwise. Many of them. I - opposed during the committee debate, but in many instances, by views did not prevail. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. MORGAN) has clearly H 11533 explained what is in this bill and its Importance, and I shall not attempt to cover that ground again. Nor do I in- tend to emphasize my own reservations. about the drastic cuts- which have been approved by the committee in- its collec- tive wisdom. Instead, Mr. Chairman, I should like to contribute to this debate a positive note. My intention is to point out what I believe is essential in the bill, and why I earnestly believe it should be passed in its present imperfect form. As I look back on more than two decades of con- troversy on this issue, I feel it is especially Important to consider past, present, and future alternatives. What, we must ask ourselves, might the world be like to- - day-even in its delicate state of 1974- if the United States had repudiated its international responsibilities following World War II? What would Europe be like today without the Marshall plan? Or the developing nations without Point Four and its successor programs of tech- nical cooperation and development as- sistance? These programs, I need not re- mind my colleagues, have been supported by both major- political parties in the Congress under the leadership of six presidents over a period of more than 25 years. The cost of these programs, as many of our colleagues are quick to point out, has been considerable. Some, unfortu- nately, have been characterized by waste and mismanagement. But cost must be measured not only in terms of results but also against the probable cost of in- action. Inaction by the Western democ- racies; in the thirties led to the costliest and most destructive war in the "history of human conflict." And the cost of turn- ing our backs on the developing world - today could have equally damaging con- sequences. Let us consider the results of our for- eign aid programs: From my vantage point since 1961 as a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee,.help- ing to oversee foreign aid authorizations during a decade characterized as the "decade of development," I can say un- equivocally that the less developed na- tions, despite the greatest obstacles- drought, floods, natural calamities, civil strife, and turmoil-have achieved more than even the most optimistic among us had thought possible- when I took my seat in Congress in 1953. - Despite allegations to the contrary, Mr. Chairman, the international de- velopment effort is working. In the last decade-the 1960's-the less developed economies as a whole grew at an average rate of 5.6 percent. This exceeds-I re- peat, exceeds-the rate of growth in the industrialized countries during compar- able periods in their history. On the agricultural front, the intro- duction of high-yield varieties of wheat, corn and rice, and the massive quanti- ties of commercial fertilizer through the U.S. foreign aid program has increased food production in the less developed countries by an encouraging 36 percent. Andlet us always remember, Mr. Chair- man, that an increase in local food pro- duction Is always cheaper in the long run than is the shipment of emergency food supplies directly from the United Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 11 11534 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE December 10, 1974 States. Again, we must consider the cost of failing to do what is necessary. In industrial terms, manufacturing )utput in the developing countries has crown an astonishing 92 percent. As a notable example, the rapid growth of in- dustry in Korea boosted that country's ;rocs national production to a record 9-. percent average for the decade-almost aouhle the growth of the 1950's. Taiwan s another example of what a vigorous elf--help effort can accomplish-when supplemented by outside assistance. mere are many other impressive ex- smples of this trend-too numerous to mention and analyze at this time. But let me turn from the past record of accomplishment to the present busi- ness at hand-and the challenges which he ahead. We all recognize, I believe, the precarious nature of the world's economy. We are increasingly conscious of the sig-- xnificance of the major shifts of assets from the industrialized to the oil-produc- ing nations. We cannot help but be aware e>f the dangers inherent in the tenuous balance still being preserved in the Mid- dle East. If we are truly concerned about ost, let us consider for a moment the Bost to the United States alone-not to mention our NATO allies-which re?- :,ulted from last year's Yom Kippur war and the subsequently imposed Arab oil. boycott. Even more Important, let us con- ;ider also the possible effects of another, disastrous conflagration. I do not for a moment contend that we e;an "buy" peace in the Middle East through the simple expedient of a gener- ous commitment to foreign assistance. At this somber stage-when lines appear to he hardening on both sides, particularly over the Palestinian question-it is diffi- cult even to predict whether another out- break of hostilities can be avoided at all. 'What can be stated with assurance, how- ever, is .that every possible effort must be made to avoid such a calamity. In this connection I commend President Ford and Secretary Kissinger for their de- termination to walk the last mile down the road in search of a peaceful and equitable solution. It is absolutely essen- tial that such efforts be continued and encouraged despite the obvious obstacles that lie ahead. The bill before us today contains a highly significant Middle East "pack- age." This package, however, I repeat will not, by and of itself, secure peace in that part of the world. It does, however, provide our Government -and our policy- makers with a most useful negotiating tool which could strengthen the case for a peaceful option. This is a balanced package. I should add, which offers $250 :trillion in security supporting assistance to Egypt and Israel alike. It also provides for a Middle East Special Requirements Fund, which can be used as circum- stances require to make negotiations a more attractive prospect for potential belligerents. Israel, moreover, is author- iaed $100 million in MAP assistance and $200 million in FMS credit sales. These amounts will contribute to Israel's own defense at a time when her position is. critical-indeed, many believe, seriously threatened. This investment in a peaceful resolu- tion of differences-which I repeat may or may not be attainable--is a modest one indeed, if we consider some of the alternatives. The potential cost of re- newed hostilities, involving the risk of renewed boycotts and economic retalia- tion by the oil-producing Arab nations, renewed demands for Israel's resupply and the dangers of great power involve- ment, is astronomic. Again, the economic risks of passing this authorization bill are miniscule when compared to the risks of doing nothing. This br.11 also attempts to alleviate, to some small degree, the most compelling problems of food shortage and famine and excessive population growth. Again, I think, we must ask ourselves how long we can afford to ignore the basic needs of the economically disadvantaged two- thirds of the world who by the year 2000 will make up three-quarters of the global population. And what will be the conse- quences of inaction for ourselves? Finally, Mr. Chairman, let me say a few words about security assistance, which is a key element of this legislation. Military spending; I recognize, is under mounting attack these days and is be- coming an. increasingly popular target for severe cuts. Many, in fact, view se- curity assistance in the same vein, but the analogy is inaccurate and in'isleading. On the contrary, there is no better way to add to the burdens and the costs of maintaining a large defense establish- ment than to curtail severely our invest- ment in international security assistance, which is the cornerstone of our strategic defense policy. That policy has been based on the long-held, and I believe reasonable, assumption that by assisting other countries of strategic importance to us-countries which are seriously. committed to their own defense and in- dependence-we are protecting our own interests in the area. And this can be done at far less cost than would be the case if we were obliged to carry this bur- den directly. I recognize, of course, that the defini- tion of what constitutes "strategic im.- portance" has been called into question in recent years. Some critics have argued that the ultimate tragedy of Vietnam has been the overcommitment of U.S. forces and resources to one limited area of the world. The charge is not without sub- stance. With the benefit of hindsight, I am personally convinced that the direct takeover of all military operittions in Vietnam by U.S. forces was an error of judgment. As I stated last March on the floor of this Chamber, I bear some re- sponsibility for that decision on the basis of my voting record. The point is, however, that the tremen- dous sacrifice of U.S. lives and treasure have been made-for better or worse. Now that U.S. troops have been with- drawn and a deescalation of the fighting has been brought about, it would be the height of folly to cut off supplies of needed equipment and ammunition at a time when the Vietnamese, not the Americans, are carrying the major de- fense burden. For let it be clearly under- stood that if we do less than is required, we shall be contributing not to peace In Vietnam, but to the likelihood of renewed and protracted conflict. In global terms, moreover, another reality must be understood : there is a vast area, extending roughly from the Persian Gulf and Indian ocean to the far reaches of the Pacific, which is highly unstable politically and potentially ex- plosive. A recourse to arms is always a possibility to be reckoned with--as is the sudden eruption. of local or regional con- flicts into worldwide crises in which the U.S. interest could be seriously and ad- versely affected. For this reason, I have long felt it to be dangerous in the extreme for Congress to attempt to legislate, on a country-by- country basis, the level of assistance to be provided. It Is risky to tinker with our existing global defense posture without devising a substitute overall coordinated plan which will not disrupt the tenuous balance which still prevails. This is a risk which the Congress has not yet been willing or equipped to undertake. Nevertheless, the argument is made by a number of our colleagues that the se- curity assistance program to often has had the effect of subsidizing authori- tarian and repressive regimes around the world to America's detriment. It is, of course, inevitable that as a world power, with worldwide responsi- bilities, we shall at times find ourselves, in the process of defending oxr own in- terests, assisting some authoritarian governments. Unfortunately, if we look at the state of the world today-as it exists rather than as we might wish it existed-we find only a handful of real "democracies," as Americans would de- fine that term. Outside of the Western Hemisphere and Western Europe, democratic governments are at a pre- mium. That is true in most of the Near East and South Asia, in Africa, the Par East, and Latin America. There are some obvious and impressive exceptions to this general rule, which are easily identifiable for being just that-exceptions. This leads me to some final comments about the Thieu government in South Vietnam, which has been the focus of much exaggerated and, in my opinion, unwarranted criticism in recent months. No one argues that the Republic of Viet- nam is a perfect, unblemished democ- racy-which provides its citizens with all of the constitutional protections which we are fortunate enough to enjoy. How- ever, if we look at the total, worldwide picture-in which authoritarian govern- ments predominate-I believe the South Vietnamese do not compare unfavor- ably-especially for a people which has no tradition of parliamentary rule and which has been massively engaged in domestic conflict for over two decades. If the GVN is as "repressive" as has been alleged, the question arises as to why there is so much evidence of dissent, which has been covered in such pain- staking detail by the international news media. Why do we hear of large demon- strations, of petitions, and of stormy, free-swinging parliamentary sessions? Are these, we might ask, manifestations of a totalitarian dictatorship? We might also ask ourselves why, since the de facto partition of Vietnam In. 1954-55, some 800,000 inhabitants of the North fled to the South? And why even today are con- tinuing defections occurring from the Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 CIA=RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 December 16, 1974 CONGR:ESSIYTTAT: ` RIEOffs ` - IbU E Communist side-with only a trickle moving in the other direction? I realize, Mr. Chairman, that the con- temporary mood is one of disillusionment and frustration-frustration over past military involvements and over present inflation and recession. It is, however, a dangerous illusion to suppose that we can have economic recovery at home amid chaos and instability abroad. Let me conclude, Mr. Chairman, by appealing to all Members, whether or'not they have supported this type of legisla- tion in the past-and I extend that ap- peal to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle-to consider the overriding issues at stake, rather than the imperfections of the bill before us. And I ask them to ponder also the available alternatives. For the United States shares one in- tractable problem with every other na- tion on this planet: We cannot "stop the world and get off." History has taught us that major responsibilities may be post- poned for a time, but they can never be completely avoided. The question re- mains: Postponement for how long- and at what cost? This is the question which I leave future Congresses to answer. And I wish for future Members the patience of Job, the vision of Moses, and the wisdom of Solomon. Mr. Chairman, I urge the adoption of H.R. 17234. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. ALEXANDER). Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise today during debate on the foreign aid bill to announce that I shall offer an amendment on page 30, after line 12, when we proceed under the 5-minute rule, for the purpose of establishing the sense of Congress that the President shall enter into negotiations with each country receiving assistance under the Foreign Aid Act of 1961 which is in de- fault for more than 90 days prior to the enactment of this bill. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Committee on Government Operations, my Subcommittee on Foreign Operations has for-4 years conducted hearings on the status of the repayment of delin- quent foreign debts. Although some progress has been made, Mr. Chairman, it is my considered opinion, which Is shared by many Members of this body, that the Department of State lacks the necessary determination and. dedication to properly represent the best interests of the taxpayers of America. Mr. Chairman, I submit that more is needed and that my amendment will take the next step toward the collection of delinquent foreign debts by express- ing the sense of Congress that the Pres- ident shall enter into negotiations with each country which is. delinquent in the payment of its debts for more than 90 days. Mr. WOLFF. Mr. Chairman, will the The gentleman, as most of us, know; them to other countries. Also, funds gentleman yield2 measures up, in the highest and fullest which had been authorized for economic Mr. ALEXANDER. I yield to the gen- degree, to his distinguished family name development have been transferred to tleman from New.York. and tradition. He has given signal lead- military uses. Mr. WOLFF. Mr. Chairman, I wish to ership in this House and on the Com- There are four amendments in this congratulate the gentleman on his pro- mittee on Foreign Affairs. It has been a area. One would limit to a 10-percent de- posed amendment. The gentleman knows rich privilege to work with him and to viatiorL from the backup request the that for a long time I have attempted to collect foreign debts owed this Nation and I have circulated a House resolution that has more than 235 cosponsors. One point that I note, however, is that in the gentleman's amendment, he ex- cludes the debts owed to us as a result of World -War I. Those debts are still legal and binding, and they amount to well over $12 billion. That money would come in mighty handy today here at home. Mr. Chairman, I would hope that the gentleman would include in his amend- ment World War I debts as well. Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Chairman, but for the possibility of a point of order on this amendment, they would have been included. I think the gentleman will have an opportunity later to cross that bridge. Mr. BROOMFIELD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ALEXANDER. I yield to the gen- tleman from Michigan. (Mr. BROOMFIELD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BROOMFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I also wish to join in paying tribute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. ALEX- ANDER) for his excellent work in this field on the Committee on Government Operations. This is something that I think we have not really paid much attention to. I think that if we take Into account what the gentleman from New York (Mr. WoLr') has mentioned, as far as World War I debts are concerned, we are talking about possibly something in excess of $60 bil- lion owed to the United States. Mr. Chairman, I pay tribute to the gentleman. I support the gentleman's amendment, and I hope the House will support the gentleman when he offers his amendment. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. BvcHANAN) (Mr. BUCHANAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation. I be- lieve the programs herein authorized to be funded to be in the national interest of the United States, and, therefore, in the interest of the American people. Mr. Chairman, I would like to identify myself with the remarks of the distin- guished ranking minority member of the :a 11535 recognize that leadership.. The Congress and the country will be poorer by the gentleman's retirement from the House at the end of this current session of Con- gress. So, Mr. Chairman, I would salute the distinguished ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and express my gratitude for. his leadership in the Congress. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 10 minutes to the gentle- man from Ohio (Mr. WHALEN). (Mr. WHALEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. WHALEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 17234, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974. Mr. Chairman, the measure which we are considering today bears no resem= blance to the foreign assistance request which was introduced in June of this year and assigned to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. The committee made ex- tensive changes in the bill. Actually there were 65 amendments proposed during the committee's deliberations; 51 of these were adopted. These amendments fall into three dis- tinct categories. The first category changes the authorized spending limita- tions from those proposed in the original bill. These fall into seven areas. First, the authorization of last year for development assistance was reduced by $75 million. Second, last year's au- thorization for population planning and health was increased by the committee by $20 million in view of the very serious concerns in this area. Third, last year's authorization for the United Nations' Relief and Works Agency was.increased by $6 million. Fourth, Mr. Chairman, the funds for postwar Indochina recon- strucion were reduced from $939 million to $573 million, or a cut of $366 million. Fifth, security supporting assistance was increased by $200 million, from $385 million to $585 million. I would point out that this $200 million increase, all of it is earmarked for Israel. Sixth, the military assistance program was 'reduced by $240 million, from the $985 million originally requested to $745 million. Also, of this $745 million, $100 million is earmarked for Israel. Seventh, foreign military sales are re- duced by $150 million, from $555 million to $405 million. . Mr. Chairman, this represents a re- Committee on Foreign Affairs, the gen- duction of $609 million from the $3.2 tleman from New Jersey (Mr. FRELING- , billion originally requested by the ad- HtnrsEN).? I think the statesmanship of ministration. his remarks spoke well enough for all of The second category of amendments us and gave us the reasons why we ought imposes restrictions upon the ability of to pass this bill. the executive branch, to transfer funds I ought not let this occasion pass with- from one category to another. out saying a word of appreciation for the A word of explanation here is in order. leadership of the gentleman himself on In past years the administration often the Committee on Foreign Affairs and has taken funds which have been re- in the Congress of the United States. quested for one country and assigned Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA.RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE December 10, 1974- amount of funds authorized for any particular country. The second amendment prohibits, as the Chairman pointed out, the transfer of economic development funds for mili- tary use. Third, the President, under the pro- visions of this bill, is required to report all military sales involving a total of $25 million or more for any specific item of equipment. Fourth, as the Chairman also pointed out, this bill prohibits the transfer of nuclear reactors as a part of the assist- ance provided to the Middle East under title I of the bill. The third category of amendments deals with human rights. A general statement concerning human rights was adopted by the committee, and I refer my colleagues to page 14 of this bill for the text of this amendment. Also, two specific human rights amendments were adopted, one limiting aid to Chile, the other im- posing restrictions upon military assist- ance provided to Korea. Mr. Chairman, I think the bill that emerged from the Committee on Foreign Affairs is a substantial improvement upon the measure that was originally introduced in June of this year. I urge the Members of this body to ap- prove H.R. 17234, and I do so for four reasons: First, this bill certainly contributes to the foreign policy initiatives undertaken by the executive branch, particularly so in the case of the Middle East peace- keeping effort which took place after the October war. Second, H.R. 17234 lives up to the ad- monition of President Ford who urged Congress to "bite the bullet." It does represent a substantial reduc- tion in the authorization requested which, as I pointed out, was cut from $3.2 billion to $2.6 billion. Third, this bill gives Congress much greater control over foreign aid expend- itures than in the past. As I have indi- cated, the Congress now has control over transfer of funds from one country to another, over the transfer of funds from economic development,to military pur- poses. The fourth reason that I support this measure, and urge my colleagues to do likewise, is that it takes a very strong position in the field of human rights. We have heard some comments this afternoon about a "perfect" bill. I sup- pose for the gentleman from Iowa, a "perfect" bill would be no bill at all. Certainly I find some imperfections In the bill myself, and I know that other members of the committee do, also. Let me point out that the administration fought many of the amendents which were adopted by the committee, but the administration has indicated that they want a bill, and they have urged that this body approve the bill adopted by the Foreign Affairs Committee. Mr. Chairman, again, I urge all of my colleagues to support the Foreign Assist- ance Act of 1974. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chair- man, will the gentleman yield, Mr. WHALEN. I yield to the gentle- man from Colorado. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chair- man, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding to me, and I would like to have a comment from someone on this, which is one of the things that disturbs me, and I guess I am the only one that it disturbs, and that is that we seem to be sending arms to both sides to be used in the next conflict in the Middle East. The committee has increased by $200 million, as the chairman stated, the administration's request for funds avail- able to Israel. I really have not heard the justification for this increase. I would like to hear somebody discuss this from the point of view of providing arms in a volatile situation to both sides, because it seems to be that if things should go wrong they could be used against each other, and that we are providing aid to our friends on both sides to kill our friends on both sides. Mr. MOIIGAN. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, let me say that we are giving no direct military arms, this is $250 million in reconstruction financ- ing. Mr. WHALEN. This also involves a discussion of our Middle East policy, and. certainly this issue cannot be discussed in the time remaining to me. I think we would all agree that it would be ex-? trem.ely desirable If there were no fric- tions in the Middle East, that there were no war there in the past, and that all countries in the Middle East agreed to a very minimum level of arms. But the unfortunate.situation is that Russia has supplied the Arab States with arms, and we have responded by supplying not only Israel, but certain other Arab States which we count among our friermis. I dis- like this myself, but I think that we must keep a balance of arms in the Mid-? dle East. Unfortunately, we are respond-? ing to a fact of life over which at this point we have no control. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. If the gentleman. will yield further, it is also true, as the chairman of the committee has pointed out, that some of the $250 million in aid is going to Egypt, and some of it is going to Jordan, and. is nonmili- tary, but let me point out that this Is significant economic assistance which will free other resources for providing arms for those countries. We''are provid- ing arms to Jordan and to Saudi Arabia. I really believe that there has to be some better alternative than that of arming both sides in these possible conflicts. I do not know whether anyone else agrees with me on that or not. Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, would the gentle- man in the well agree that this ?aid par- ticularly the aid to Egypt and the other aid to other Arab States, is all part and parcel of the efforts that the adminis- tration has been making and, which were extraordinarily successful last January, and later on, in achieving some motion toward peace in the Middle East? This is all part of that effort, and an integral part of that effort, as Secretary of State Kissinger has made clear, and one that he feels would contribute to his efforts to bring peace to that area. Mr. WHALEN. I would certainly agree, and the chairman of the committee in his presentation brought that out also. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gen- tleman has expired. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 1 additional minute to the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. WHAT EN. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the additional time, and I again yield to the gentleman from Colorado. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chair- man, I keep asking this question, and this concerns me also, but I do not seem to receive an answer to it: and that is if this bill is supposedly in support of the administration'* position, why did the committee increase the amount of arms aid to Israel by $200 million? Mr. WHALEN. I believe the chairman answered that question. Mr. WOLFF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. WHALEN. I yield to the gentleman from New York. Mr. WOLFF. Mr. Chairman, there is also increased aid from the Soviet Union that has gone to Syria. Even greater now than even has been given Egypt in the past. The Soviet Union up to the present time has put some $10 billion of military assistance into that area. Since the war, they had completely resupplied not only Egypt but Syria to such an extent that Syria today is a much more formidable military machine than they were prior to the war. Mr. WHALEN. There is one other point, also. The administration requested $100 million in military credit sales for Israel. We switched that out of that category into the military assistance pro- gram. This was, as pointed out by the chairman, the first time, really, that Is- rael has received an outright grant of military equipment. They purchased it in the past, but in view of the October War which so depleted their resources, it was the feeling of the committee that we should forego military credit sales in favor of the grant. A commensurate re- duction was then made in the total mili- tary credit sales. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gen- tleman has expired. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 additional minute to the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. WHALEN. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana. Mr. HAMILTON. I thank the gentle- man for yielding. The major reason for the increase over the executive request is that the original executive request came prior to the Octo- ber war, and the committee considered thebill after the October war. The orig- inal executive request of $50 million was actually made up prior to that war. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. Chair- man, will the gentleman yield? Mr. WHALEN. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. I thank the gentleman for yielding. That cannot be right. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. MoRGAN) said it came up in May of this year; the war was last year. Mr. HAMILTON.. If the gentleman from Ohio will yield further, the original Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 December 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE II 11537 executive request was set before that war, and it was not changed, and it came to the Congress with expectation that the Congress would increase it. The Execu- tive accepted the increase. Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. If the gentleman will yield further, 6 months behind is a normal matter of routine? If the war was fought in September 1973, the request came up in May of this year? The request was prepared in October of the year before? Mr. HAMILTON. It is correct the bill was not submitted to us until June, but the Executive, in anticipation of the in- crease by Congress, lust left the security supporting assistance. amount at $50 mil- lion, which was the figure that they had initially set prior to the October war. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. BINGHAM). (Mr. BINGHAM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, first I should like to Join in complimenting the chairman of the committee. It has been truly a pleasure to work with him in the long process of bringing this bill to the floor. I should like to join, too, in complimenting the ranking member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs; the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. FaE- LINGHUYSEN). He will be missed in the committee and in the House. Also, I want to say that many of us are very grate- ful to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. WHALEN) for the work that he did in bringing together a group again and again to try to agree on certain amend- ments that would improve the bill. I should like to direct my remarks at this point to those Members who may feel tempted to vote against H.R. 17234 because they feel this bill authorizes too much military assistance to repressive regimes. I will say to those Members that I will Join with them in efforts to cut that as- sistance or to restrict it in some way. I did so in the committee, and I will do so again here on the floor. But I would urge them, if any of those efforts fail, not to vote against the bill, because if this bill is defeated, the alter- native would be a continuing resolution and if we have such a continuing resolu- tion, we will fail to benefit from the many salutary changes in the aid programs that are achieved in this legislation. Some of these have been mentioned by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. WHALEN). For example, if we defeat this bill, we will lose the opportunity to increase -by more than 60 percent the developmental assistance for agriculture that is au- thorized in this bill, and there is nothing we need more in this world today than greater agricultural production: We face a worldwide food crisis. We are going to be called upon to respond to that crisis in terms of assistance in the form of grain, and we will no doubt do so. But this is the most inefficient way to respond to the crisis. A far better way is to respond by helping other nations to grow more food, and this bill will pro- vide the authority to increase that program. Also this bill will provide for an in- crease in our population control assist- ance programs, which are also needed in the food crisis as part of the equation. And this is something else we would not be able to do if we had to operate under a continuing resolution. Then, too, we have in this bill increases for assistance to Israel, which have been mentioned and which are essential in the light of Israel's economic situation today. If we are ever to have peace in the Middle East, and I pray that we will, we have got to make it perfectly clear that the United States is going to give Israel the wherewithal to survive eco- nomically and militarily. Otherwise there is no incentive for the Arabs to make an agreement. There are also in this bill certain re- strictions on aid which will be lost if we defeat this bill and go on a continuing resolution. One is that for the first time Congress will have some control over the military cash sales program, which has grown enormously in recent years. This bill provides us with a handle on that type of assistance which we have not had before. The bill also provides some restraint on the operations'of the CIA, and there are other valuable restrictions in the bill. As a result of the excellent work done in the committee by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. HAMILTON), the bill also prohibits the kinds of transfers of funds that the administration has used in the past to divert from the purposes the Congress wanted pursued to other pur- poses; that practice will be restrained under this legislation. This too would be lost if H.R. 17234 is defeated. As I have said, I agree with those Members who feel there is too much money in this bill for military assistance to repressive regimes. But, having done what we can to reduce that assistance, I would plead with them then to help pass a bill that the world needs and which is in the interest of the United States. Let me now go over some of these points in greater detaiP. The principal purpose of H.R. 17234 is to authorize appropriations totaling $2,643.3 million for fiscal 1975 for in- ternational security assistance, economic assistance, and military credit sales programs. The bill, while not perfect, is responsible and responsive. It provides the administration with funds to execute our aid programs in a manner consistent with our national security. But it also makes clear to the administration the conviction of the Congress and the American people that the American for- eign aid program must reflect the tradi- tional American commitment to human rights and improving the well-being of the world's poor and must not be used to prop up repressive regimes. The American people expect the Con- gress to legislate new directions to our international assistance programs. To fail to pass this aid bill would be to fall in this task. If A.R. 17234 were to be defeated, we would then no doubt pass a continuing resolution, which would permit a contin- uatioia of the administration's present aid policies. In contrast, H.R. 17234 would. modify important aspects of the administration's general policies and re- vise funding levels of programs to reflect a belief that America should increase developmental and humanitarian aid and place limits on military aid. The Congress faces two alternatives- we can pass this bill or we can rely on a continuing resolution to fund our aid programs. The latter, a continuing res- olution, is by far less desirable. A continuing resolution would not per- mit us to be responsive to the legitimate needs of our friends and allies for in- creased development assistance and eco- nomic aid. First, it would not permit an increase of over ;50 percent in the authorization for agriculture, rural development and nu- trition for fiscal year 1975. The foreign aid bill would increase the authoriza- tion for this purpose from $291 million to $471.3 million, an increase of $180.3 million. Agriculture and rural development constitute an area of the highest prior- ity. The less developed world's need for aid for agricultural production more urgent than ever. Many of the less developed nations have been severely af- fected by the sudden and drastic in- creases in prices for fertilizer, fuel, food, and other commodities. Some face the prospect of massive starvation deaths because of food shortfalls. There is no doubt that these nations will need food aid, nor that we will provide it. How- ever, if we can, without neglecting our own agricultural production, contribute to increased food production abroad, we are helping ourselves in the process. There is also convincing evidence that increases in food production in the de- veloping countries are less costly to achieve than they are here. It, therefore,. makes humanitarian and economic sense for-Congress to do all it can to increase the food producing capac- ity of the hungry nations so that they can better meet their own needs in the future. Second, a continuing resolution would not permit an increase in funding for population control programs, which are an integral part of economic develop- ment and social progress. Unrestrained population growth only exacerbates the current food scarcity crisis in many parts of the world. H.R. 17234, by authorizing an additional $20 million for programs designed to control population growth, will help us also to meet the current food Third, and as importantly, a continu- ing resolution would not permit the in- creases in security supporting and grant military assistance to Israel which the Foreign Affairs Committee believes are necessary to assist Israel in meeting its financial burdens and legitimate secu- rity needs. In contrast, the foreign aid bill would increase the funding for secu- rity supporting assistance to Israel from $50 million to $250 million and transfer $100 million from. the administration's proposed foreign military credit sales to Israel. to grant aid for Israel. Without Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --.HOUSE December 10, 1974 passage of the foreign aid bill, Israel would be hard-pressed to meet its in- creasing financial burden alone, and its well-being and security might be im- paired. In addition to thwarting the will of Congress to respond to the legitimate needs of our friends and allies for devel- opment and economic assistance, the defeat of this bill and reliance on a con- tinuing resolution would thwart the will of Congress to set new policy directions for American aid programs. The foreign aid bill contains important restrictive provisions which would not be operative under a continuing resolution. These include: First, restrictions on aid to na- tions which deny free emigration or free expression of human rights within their borders; second, restrictions on execu- tive branch authority to conclude large cash sales of military equipment with- out informing Congress; third, restric- tions on the nature of CIA operations; and fourth, restrictions on the transfer of funds from productive developmental uses such as agriculture to nonproduc- tive uses such as political support. The provisions related to human rights would alert the President and foreign countries. The American commitment to human rights conditions our decisions on allocation of foreign aid funds, and that a nation's violation of its citizens' hu- man rights, including the freedom of emigration, may result in severe limita- tion or denial of American aid. I think the Foreign Affairs Committee actions reducing the administration's request for aid to Chile and Korea are good steps In that direction. I would support even further reduction in aid to Korea. They will alert those nations and others, such as Syria, to our active concern with hu- man rights and to our determination to predicate our foreign aid in large part on their respect for their citizen's rights. The provision requiring the President to submit to Congress' quarterly esti- mates of foreign military sales and to report to Congress 20 legislative days be- fore any foreign military sale of $25 mil- lion or more, and providing for a con- gressional veto of such sales would en- able the Congress for the first time to exercise effective oversight and control over the amount of defense articles sold for cash each year. This oversight and control is important because of the im- pact that such sales often have on our relations with the purchasing country and its neighbors. Present reporting pro- cedures require only yearly estimates of cash sales. These have proven inaccur- ate. For example, the original Depart- ment of Defense estimates for cash sales in fiscal year 1974 was $3.6 billion. Ac- tual cash sales totaled $5.9 billion. The $2.3 difference clearly demonstrates the need for more frequent reporting so that Congress may monitor the sales program more closely. The enactment of the pro- vision requiring reports prior to large sales will give the Congress the oppor- tunity to study the circumstances sur- rounding each major sale and to asses their foreign policy impact, and if called for, Congress would lack this authority under a continuing resolution. The bill would also establish policy guidelines for our intelligence activities, and an oversight role for the foreign af- fairs committees of the House and Sen- ate. It would thereby assure that our in- telligence activities are in consonance with both our legitimate national security requirements and our overall foreign policy interests. It would also Insure that Congress is informed and consulted about covert and other activities which may have Important foreign policy and na- tional security implications. Finally, the bill would prohibit trans- fer of development assistance funds to any country which receives security sup- porting assistance, Indochina aid, or as- sistance under the Middle East peace package or vice versa. This would strengthen congressional control over the use of foreign aid funds, and assure that the will of Congress is followed. It would preclude it repeat of such actions as the unilateral executive branch decision in fiscal year 1974 to give South Vietnam a $50 million development loan for what appeared to be political rather than de- velopmental reasons. In conclusion, I would urge you to sup- port the foreign aid bill, as reported out of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The bill will enable us to take many important steps toward modifying the di- rection of our foreign aid policies and strengthening congressional control and oversight. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. on PoNT). (Mr. r PONT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re-- marks.) Mr. or PONT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support, of the Foreign Assistance Act. We worked very hard in committee to pare down the request of the adminis- tration, but I do want to take this time to be somewhat critical of one section of the bill, and that is the exhorbitant amount of aid that is in the bill for Arab nations in the Middle East. I of.. fered an amendment in committee to try to do something about this and It was soundly defeated, so perhaps I should not be taking time on the floor, but I do think we added a tremendous amount of money in an effort to buy something. Perhaps we are trying to buy peace, per- haps we are trying to buy friends, or perhaps we are trying to avert another war, but look at what we have done. We have started a foreign aid program to Egypt and to Syria, a brand new pro- gram that was not there before. And how have we bid into this new poker game? We have bid in at a very high level-$100 million in discretionary funds and $250 million for Egypt. The Members know as well as I do that foreign assistance programs grow. They do not shrink. Next year the request will. be up. I think it is far too much money to be spending in that area of the world. If we look at the summary table of this legislation we will see where the money is being spent, and we will find the committee did ,a very prudent job in pruning back Indochina aid, in :pruning back the foreign military aid, but when it comes to security supporting assistance last year $112 million was appropriated, and the administration came in and asked for $385 million, but the Foreign Affairs Committee In a burst of generos- ity appropriated $585 million. Most of that excess amount is going to Jordan and Syria and Egypt. I will be frank to say I think we are throwing away in those specific areas the taxpayers' money. it is too much money. I think that particular section of the bill is a poor one, but aside from that I give my wholehearted support to the bill and I plan to vote for it on final passage on the floor. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 10 minutes to the gentle- man from Illinois (Mr. AxnERsoN). (Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and ex- tend his remarks.) Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. Mr. Chair- man, in considering the foreign aid bill we need to distinguish between two ques- tions: How do we meet aid needs and com- mitments this year? In what direction do we move over the longer run? On the first question, the only answer that I can come up with is to pass the bill now before us. There is no time to develop a better alternative, given the present advanced date, and to reject the bill outright would be a tragic default on our responsibilities, given the diverse needs that it addresses and the modest scale on which it proposes to meet them-needs which have been sharply aggravated, I may say, by the recent large increase in oil, wheat, and fer- tilizer prices. But for the longer term I find the di- rection represented by this bill unsati&- factory. For several reasons: It Is a bilateral aid program, and It seems to me that the time for bilateral aid is long since passed, given the wealth of other potential donors; It still reflects the thinking of the im- mediate postwar period, in which the distinction between donors and recipi- ents was sharply drawn by tragic cir- cumstances. What we need now Is not so much hand-me-downs from rich to poor countries, as cooperative effort by both rich and poor countries to meet common problems; It is geared, in good part, to cold war objectives that have little to do with the economic problems that now must con- cern us increasingly. Trying to deal with both security and economic problems in one program In apt to mean that neither is effectively addressed; and It has become so encrusted over the years with legislative restrictions and bureaucratic limitations as to lack the flexibility that Is required to deal with new emerging problems. For these and other reasons, I believe that we should mark 1975 as the last year in which the Congress will try to meet the needs for overseas capital transfers through this type of program. Bilateral foreign aid has served us well, but, it is time to move on to other means-at least as far as the nonsecurity problems that we must meet abroad are concerned. In part, of course, we have done this-- in supporting the World Bank, regional development banks, and the U.N. de- velopment program-and I hope that Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 s 1 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 December 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 1111539 this will continue. In particular, I hope that the Congress will permit the United States to contribute to the World Bank's soft loan window, the International De- velopment Association, on a scale that will enable this businesslike operation to go forward on the scale that other donors favor and are ;prepared to sup- port. But these organizations would be.the first to admit that what they are doing is not enough-and cannot be enough. We face new and mounting economic problems overseas. They must be met. Foreign aid of the sort that we are de- bating today is not an effective way of doing so. But inaction will not solve these problems either. We need to take new bearings, Foreign aid rested on the concept that rich countries should share their bounty with the poor. The rich were in good shape the poor were in bad shape and transferring resources from the one to the other would help to right the situa- tion. But this is no longer an accurate description of the situation. Both rich and poor countries are now in deep trou- ble, and because of the same problems: food, energy, population, and environ- ment. The way to deal with these prob- lems. is not by handouts to help the poor but by joint efforts to solve the problems. Of these, the most urgent is food. It is important to the developing countries because they are not getting enough to eat. It is important to the developed countries because worldwide food short- ages mean rising prices, which spur in- flation. The answer to both developed and developing countries' problems is more production. Only increased pro- duction will assure adequate availability of foodstuffs and stable prices. Since the market in food is a world market, In- creased production anywhere will help. But, particularly, we need more produc- tion in the developing countries, where the opportunities for increase are greatest. Enlarged food production requires cap- ital investment-in farm machinery, irrigation, fertilizer production, and much else. It requires technical skills. It requires sensible pricing and other poli- cies. All this is. primarily the respons- bility, of the countries in which produc- tion takes place. But internatonal co- operation is also required. This need was recognized at the recent World Food Conference, where various proposals were made for joint effort to this end. Particularly important was the Egyptian proposal for a world food fund, to which not only the traditional donor nations but others-including the oil-exporting countries-would contribute and whose resources would be used to support in- vestments to increase food production which could not be financed through other means. In the wake of that Con- ference, this and other proposals for joint action are being urgently studied. I submit that dedicating the sums that we have traditionally appropriated for bilateral foreign economic aid to sup- port an international world food effort would be a more useful way to spend these sums in the future. This option is not now before us: Activating an inter- national world food efforts would be a more useful way to spend these sums in the future. This option is not now be- fore us: Activating an international food effort will take time. Hopefully, by next year such an effort will be sufficiently advanced so that we could move in this direction. In doing so, we would be help- ing not only to avert starvation abroad but also to meet very serious problems at home: Unless we are to adopt export controls, which would invite instant re- taliation by other, our food availabili- ties and prices will continue to be deter- mined by the worldwide balance between food supply and demand. By helping to right that balance, we help ourselves. The same principle is relevant in re- gard to energy. Here, too, there is a worldwide market between sellers and buyers. Here, too, the worldwide short- age-however artificially induced-hurts us. Here, too, development of new energy sources would serve our interests' and that of others. As I understand Secre- tary Kissinger's recent speech, it calls for just such development, in order to im- prove the global balance between energy supply and demand and thus set the stage for effective bargaining about prices with the oil exporting countries. While this development will be primarily the concern of countries in which it takes place, international cooperation will again be required, to insure that scarce capital and skills go where they can be most useful. It will be in our interest to contribute to such an effort. If our skills and resources can be put to good use in developing new energy sources in poor nations, the effort will be felt tangibly and beneficially here at home. Population and environment are other relevant areas. If opportunities to make a contribution here arise, they should be pursued. In none of thesejelds, however, are the problems as urge 'ht and impor- tant, or proposals and prospects for in- ternational programs to which we and others could contribute on, a large scale so far advanced, as in the case of food. I propose, therefore, that we now do two things: Approve this year's aid bill, to permit an orderly phasing down of bilateral eco- nomic aid; and Make clear our sense that a new ap- proach will be needed next year-an ap- proach founded on the principle not of charity from rich to poor but of joint effort by all countries-rich and poor,. alike-to meet the global food problem. We should make clear that we favor U.S. leadership in bringing about a world food fund and that, if others contribute on the scale that their resources permit, we be- lieve that the United States should do the same. And we should make evident that we favor this not as an ad hoc action but as a basic move away from the con- cept of bilateral economic aid to that of common International effort in meeting common problems-a shift that may well have relevance to the problems of energy, population, and environment, as well as food. To this end, I propose that the execu- tive and legislative branches establish next year a joixLt commission to study how such a shift might best be accom- plished-how bilateral economic aid can be phased out without disrupting pres- ent problems and commitments, and how the United States can take its place in new international effort to meet the emerging food and perhaps other prob- lems, to which all would contribute and from. which all would benefit. The time has come to put relations between indus- trial and developing countries on a new basil, which fully integrates the efforts of both to meet common problems and the duty of. both to share common re- sponsibilities. Change is the law of life. International economic needs and circumstances have changed greatly in recent years. Now our response must also change. This means not cosmetic facelifting in the present program, but a basic shift of goals and philosophy. In acting on this year's bill, we must give unmistakable evidence not only of our willingness to meet our cur- rent commitments but also of our de- termination to bring that change about. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man? will the gentleman yield? Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man,. I would like to compliment the gentleman for his comments, and say that I agree with him wholeheartedly that there is a need for far gre7.ter ef- forts than have been made thus far, es- pecially in the fields of food, energy, and population. I feel there is a need for greater international cooperation, but I wonder whether we should be so harsh on the value of bilateral aid; that argu- ments that others should be doing more can be used for an argument against bi- lateral aid. I see no early or easy alternative to substantial bilateral aid as a way of`cop- ing with the immediate problem. I see no possibility that multilateral aid would be developed to cope with the conse- quences of our involvement in Southeast Asia. I see no ready international inter- est in providing substantial funds for the Middle East, so in many ways I think our bilateral aid should not be denigrated as somehow outmoded. I think it is very up to date, both in the Middle East and in Southeast Asia. Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. Mr. Chair- man., I thank the gentleman for his re- sponse to the proposal that I have of- fered, and I think in offering -it in the form that I did, namely, . suggesting a joint commission composed of members of both the executive and the legislative branches, I was conceding in advance, perhaps, a part of his argument. The kind of shift I envisage will not be easy to attain. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gen- tleman from North Carolina (Mr. PREYER). (Mr. PREYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. PREYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill. Mr. Chairman, around the world, and especially in the Mideast, the Soviet Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 11111540 Union and its friends are making great gains at American expense. The most striking sign of Soviet success has been the blow td Secretary Kissinger's plan for a. political settlement in the Mideast by the acceptance of the Palestine Libera- tion Organization as the legitimate rep- resentative of the Palestinian cause. At the same time, the Communists are gaining in Europe. Except for Greece, the countries of the northern Mediter- ranean shore all have disciplined Com- munist movements now knocking at the gates of power. The billions in oil money flowing to the oil producing countries is threaten- ing the world's financial structure and a worldwide economic depression. The Cyprus situation threatens the loss of the southern flank of NATO: If we lose our bases in Greece and Turkey, the Med- iterranean could become a Russian sea, thus `endangering our ability to supply Israel in the event of another war there. Is this the time when Congress will. at last kill the foreign aid program? It is hard to conceive of a worse moment for such action. The purpose of the foreign aid pro- gram is to influence the future in other lands. As such it is a vital instrument of foreign policy. Its purpose is not to do good to all mankind, nor to establish democratic governments in every coun- try. The benefits of foreign aid-like for- eign policy itself-are not readily ap- parent and are long range in effect; the mistakes are immediately and highly visible. Much of the criticism of foreign aid is justified. The program should evolve and respond to this criticism, and I think this is happening. Americans are uncertain about the basic purpose of influencing the future in other lands. There are ques- tions about whether we have the taste or talent for it. Furthermore, foreign aid presents a fat political target of oppor- tunity, especially in a period of domestic recession. Attacking foreign aid for "pouring money down a rathole" is a sure-fire applause getter at any rally back in one's district. No one in this Chamber will gain any votes by voting for foreign aid. Yet if we recognize that the world is changing faster than our policy can cope with, and that we are struggling to adjust to it, surely we must support the foreign aid bill at this time until better alternatives can be developed. We can give only two cheers for foreign aid; the applause for it'is that of one hand- clapping. We can recognize that we must break away from foreign aid as a habit, as something to be routinely approved, and that we must continue to explore alternatives. But with our foreign policy losing ground to the Soviet Union, surely this is not the time to kill foreign aid. It is taking the easy way out to vote against this bill and cite the perilous state of our own economy as reason enough to keep our money at home. It is easy for that matter to contend that our sufferings in Vietnam should have taught us to back away from all "for- eign entanglements." The simple truth, however, is that we are entangled on this small planet and CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD, HOUSE December 10', 1974 our economic problems neither began solely within this country nor will we find the solutions by turning inward. The familiar arguments that foreign aid' dollars spent in the United States help our economy and that we have a moral responsibility to help the poor re- main valid. Even more important today are the questions of our own national interests in an increasingly tense world. The United States-Soviet detente must not cloud our vision. In the Middle East, in Indochina, and throughout the Third World violence and despair are growing. The United States has learned that there are limits to our ability to end conflict and correct economic ills, but we injure our own interests if we simply turn our backs on the problems of others. Our enemies portray us as capitalistic exploiters whose only goal is the maxi- mization of profits. The misinformed poor often accept this image and demand that their leaders be anti-American. We cannot "buy" the masses with foreign assistance, nor should we attempt to do so, but it is clear that much more of our aid must reach the most needy, quite aside from any desire for gratitude from the poor. The Congress has mandated changes in emphasis from. large capital development programs . to people-ori- ented assistance, and AID is well-ad- vanced In its reorganization to achieve these changes. The termination of the foreign aid program at this juncture would serve only to convince the poor and war-weary that we are interested only in hanging on to our present wealth as the Western world disintegrates. I know how difficult it is to respond to the public. outcry against spending dol- lars abroad when we are faced with grave economic problems at home. I am re- minded that when the nations of the world were turned inward in the 1930's with problems far worse than those we face today, before long they were at one anther's throats. In the much smaller and more interdependent world of today I fear that isolation would breed hatred even more quickly. And the weapons we now possess would bring total destruc- tion. With foreign assistance we cannot purchase security but we cannot help but contribute to the collapse of interna- tional cooperation if we discontinue the program now. Some of us have serious reservations about massive assistance to South Viet- nam, South Korea, and Cambodia. While I will support the amendment setting a limit on funds to Cambodia, I do think we must consider the alternatives to elimination of this assistance.. There is no question that the drain on our re- sources is considerable. There is also no question that the policies and practices of some of these governments are open to charges that they violate democratic principles and even our sense of moral- ity. Nevertheless we cannot dictate morality and we have learned the hard way that democracy cannot be imposed upon a people. We must keep foremost in any debate our own national inter- est--dean with governments as they exist with appropriate encouragement of de ocracy and justice, but defend our interests whenever and however we must. It is altogether correct and proper that we debate carefully specific items in this bill, reviewing types and amounts of assistance to particular countries where there is controversy. What is essential is that we face up to our responsibilities and opportunities by continuing the pro- gram. I would like to see a return to bi- partisanship in foreign affairs. There is a great need for openness and candor on the part of the administration in this respect. The "style" of the Departments of State and Defense in articulating and defending foreign policy must be im- proved. They must seek dialog not only with the great powers but also with the greatest power-the American peo- ple and their elected representatives. Finally I note that there is a call for an immediate cutoff of military aid to Turkey. I share with the proponents of the amendment a sense of outrage that American equipment is being used to perpetuate the illegal military occupa- tion of northern Cyprus. At the same time I ask myself what the sponsors of the cutoff hope to achieve by this meas- ure. If they seek to simply punish the Turks in the hope that they will refrain from attacking additional islands, then I believe the measure would succeed. If, on the other hand, my respected col- leagues hope to obtain the evacuation of Turkish forces from the island, then I fear the amendment is hopelessly mis- guided. History leads me to believe that Turkey win become even more deter- mined to hang on to northern Cyprus- even at the cost of denuding her north- ern frontier with the Soviet Union. The importance of Turkey to the NATO alli- ance need not be recounted. I question the wisdom of risking the alienation of a valuable ally with a punishment that however justifiable will do nothing to solve the problem of Cyprus. I urge that the Turks be given time to form a gov- ernment that can negotiate a withdrawal of troops. Tensions are rising throughout the world as food and energy become ever scarcer. If we turn inward and reject the idea of foreign aid it is likely that where war now smoulders it will explode, and where the poor are forgotten they will turn their faces forever from us. Our children will live to regret our short- sightedness long after our economic problems are back under control. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. RANGim). (Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk to strike all economic aid to Turkey until such time as they comply with the international efforts to control drugs. As most of the Members know, it has not been that many years ago that our drug enforce- ment administration had been able to determine that 80 percent of the heroin that was floated on the streets and towns of our United States found its Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 December 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 1:1 11541 origin in Turkey. As a result of the un-, opium, they are going to ask us to as- toward human needs. Likewise, I feel we conditional ban that was placed in 1972 sume the responsibility for a diversion. should allocate those resources ear- on the growth of, opium in Turkey we Mr. Chairman, this Congress has seen marked for international purposes to- have been able to find, not only in our fit to unanimously pass a resolution to ward programs directed at helping less cities and States, but certainly in the cut off all assistance to Turkey until such developed nations with fundamental drug enforcement administration, that time as they comply with our Foreign projects in agriculture, health, and edu- there was a drastic cut in the quality and Assistance Act in controlling the inter- cation. The legislation before us does re- quantity of the drugs that were made national trafficking in drugs. duce authorizations below what was re- available. The President of the United States has quested by the administration for mili- Some Members of this House, includ- not seen fit to suspend aid. The Drug En- tary assistance and foreign military cre- ing my dear colleague from New York, forcement Administration says it is an dit sales. This amount undoubtedly would LESTER WOLFF, heard rumor that the impossible situation for us or for the have been cut to a much lower level had Turkish Government intended to resume Turkish Government to police, because not the U.S. commitment to the resolu- the growth of poppies and we had reason there are some 80,000 farmers there and tion of the conflict in the Middle East to believe that the Turkish Government these farms only grow a small percent- called for additional American economic was concerned about the economic plight age of opium, which means they would and military support to both Israel and of the farmers, who represent 1 percent have to cover up to 3,000 villages to police the Arab countries. There will be efforts of the entire population of Turkey, and them in order to see whether or not they to further. reduce certain other military it was indicated. that they were suffer- are growing illegal opium. assistance authorizations, such as those ing such an economic loss as a result of If we have any concern about our men to South Korea, which can bring down this ban. in the Armed Forces who were stricken our overall outlay in the military sphere We went to Turkey and talked to the so hard by the opium crisis and if we have to an even more reasonable level. This can experts in our Department of State and any concern about our inner cities and be accomplished while still providing Foreign Service, and we were able to find our suburban areas, I think it is time for a military aid program adequate for de- out it was not the farmers who were con- the U.S. Congress to show that we mean Tense purposes. cerned about the ban but several political business, and that we are not going to cut I am pleased that the Foreign Affairs bodies in Turkey and we found out that, off assistance for all purposes, but we will Committee saw fit to adopt an amend- except as it relates to asking for Ameri- just cut off this assistance until the me9t-offered by Mr. BINGHAM and me can money, the political structure in President of the United States believes increasing by $20 million funds for popu- Turkey wanted no part of the United there is a goodfaith effort on their part lation growth and family planning pro- States and certainly felt that the ban to comply with the international sane- grams. While I believe such an expendi- was imposed as a result of President tions against those who grow these drugs. ture is essential if we expect to make Nixon's influence on that military gov- Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, progress in raising living standards in ernment. I yield such time as he may consume to the LDC's. I feel these efforts will get It seems to me that year, after year, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. nowhere unless they are accompanied by until it has now reached the billions of BXESTER). significant advances in health, agricul- dollars, the Turkish Government can re- (Mr. BIESTER asked and was given tural production and increased protein ject those parts of my argument as we permission to revise and extend his re- consumption in the poorer nations. The ask them to assist us in preventing the marks.) authorization in this bill-of $180.3 mil- poison from coming to the United States Mr. BIESTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in lion for food and nutrition programs and yet they cannot understand that support of H.R. 17234, the Foreign As- along with the $291 million already au- plight to such an extent that they might sistance Act of 1974, with a deep sense thorized for similar purposes takes us make some small sacrifice, as this Con- of concern and urgency for the programs in the direction we need to go in ad- gress has appropriated some $36 million authorized In this legislation, of which dressing the question of how we can to assist them to provide some crop sub- I am a cosponsor. make more food available to those who stitute, some type of assistance to make The major features of this bill have need :it most. certain there would be no economic or already been touched upon. We are, When we examine the state of the cultural heavy weight on the farmer. through the authorization of funds, at- world economy today, we can readily But, nevertheless, notwithstanding all tempting to help stabilize- the political see how the nations of the world com- threats to cut off aid, the Turkish Gov- and military situation in the Middle munity, have become more dependent ernment indicated unilaterally they were East, scaling down funds to Indochina, upon one another for the resolution of going to resume the growing of opium, emphasizing the importance of univer- mutually shared problems. The need and now we find one of the most terrible sal human rights, restricting the un- for even more cooperation is imperative. frauds that have been committed on the authmrized activities of the Central In- This growing interdependence has been U.S. Congress, that they were doing this telligence Agency, and increasing the accompanied by a healthy openness in with the United Nations lauding them emphasis on agricultural and nutritional multi.- and international relations and for their effort because they said they assistance to the poorer nations. Fur- trade. There is no assurance, however, would use a straw process, a process that thermore, wd are following through in that such a situation will continue and would prevent the farmer from lancing implementing the reforms made in last progress, especially if the United States the bulb and scraping off the opium sap, year's foreign assistance legislation falls to provide the participation and when there is no one in our State De- which restructured the thrust of our leadership which is so essential in main- partment and no one in the United Na- aid program to focus on basic and en- taining such a climate. At present, as we tions, and certainly no one in Turkey, demic needs of the less developed are experiencing economic difficulties of no one in our Goverment or their govern- countries. In total, $2.64 billion is au- such serious proportions, there is a con- ment, who knows where they are going thorized in appropriations for fiscal siderable temptation to turn inward for to sell the straw or whether or not the year 1975. solutions without adequate regard for United Nations intends to police the 11- The committee bill is a carefully international factors and the interna- legal growing of opium. They are talking worked piece of legislation based on the tional ramifications of our national about a $1 million, $2 million, $10 million request submitted by the administration policies. Some would eliminate or dan- alkali plant. There is no such plant in with our close attention to domestic con- gerously scale down our foreign assist- Turkey. They are saying to the United siderations and international obligations. ance efforts in order to concentrate on States that, once they start growing, we We have taken heed to balance the de- domestic priorities. Without slighting the will have the financial responsibility not , mands imposed upon us by present eco- extreme importance' of formulating a only to police the growth but to provide nomic circumstances with the respon- forceful program on the domestic front them with the funds to get the plant. sible course we feel our Nation must fol to combat inflation and recession, oue We are going to end up with the situ- low in its relations with other countries. thinking cannot be parochial. The eco- ation that we are darned if we do and We have a weighty obligation here at nomic predicament in which we find darned if we don't, because what it home. to reorder our national priorities ourselves is unlike any which ha;; means is that once they start growing away from excessive military spending preceded It. It is a truly global problem Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 H 11.542 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE December 10, 1974 with every nation-rich and poor alike- that we are in an unusual session-I Secretary of State some necessary time to inescapably locked in with one another. think we all recognize that--and a bill deal with a few ticklish problems with re- The impulse must be dismissed which that is automatically explosive suffers spect to one or two governments that may suggests that looking inward, to the the unusual possibilities of being misun- be totally incapable of adjusting to the neglect of international relationships, derstood and misinterpreted merely be- pressures and demands of this time at will resolve our economic difficulties. cause of theatmosphere of the day. this point, the next Congress would, of Rather, we must follow a policy which Second, I would point out to the gen- course, exercise necessary legislative recognizes the importance the prudent tleman who preceded me in the well, the oversight. allocation of foreign assistance funds can gentleman, from New York (Mr. RANGEL), Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield take in helping stabilize national econ- that I was one of the original cosponsors such time as he may consume to the gen- omies which, in turn, can bring back of the resolution calling for a cutoff of aid tleman from Indiana (Mr. HAMILTON). a greater semblance of order to the over- to Turkey if the agreement to cut off (Mr. HAMILTON asked and was given all world economic picture. Turkish opium production was not main- permission to revise and extend his We have an undeniably critical stake tamed. remarks.) in the future of the developing nations. We are now at the stage of saying to Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman, I Apart from the obvious' importance of the President: "Unless the Turkish Gov- rise in support of H.R. 17234, the Foreign their political posture in relation to the ernment proves to us and proves to your Assistance Act of 1974. major power blocs, they are a vital eco- satisfaction that this opium-production This bill is an unusually important nomic factor as well. Even the smallest is controlled, you may not provide them piece of legislation in several respects. In nations possess strategic raw materials with any aid." addition to cutting the administration's which are in short supply and high de- Mr. Chairman, the problem Is that request by over $600 million, this bill mand by the industrialized countries, there is nothing but a caretaker Turkish tightens legislative loopholes, restricts and the significance of all nations in Government, and under these conditions the Government's ability to use funds for the global trading picture is becoming those of us who are familiar with parlia- purposes other than those Intended by more and more apparent. It has been men.tary structures realize we Just can- Congress, authorizes reduced but ade- projected that within 10 years we will not negotiate with caretaker govern- quate funds for Vietnam, reduces sub- be dependent upon imports for 96 per- meats. The same logic, frankly, would stantially grant military aid, and pre- cent of our aluminum, 34 percent of cop- apply to-the present Government of Italy. serves increased funds for food and per, and 100 percent manganese and tin The Government of Turkey falls in that institution aid to help developing states to indicate only a few of the principal category. Perhaps the new Government improve the performance of the agricul- raw materials essential to our economy of Greece. which is just reestablishing tural sectors. and security which we must secure from itself, falls in that category, as well as a This bill also supports several impor- others. In 1972 the LDC's represented an number of other parliamentary demo- tant foreign policy ne objectives iv E the almost $15 billion market for U.S. goods cracies in the world which are going Unitto e Asia es in the e Middle the bill is and and services, and since they buy mare through the government. nature of They that tricattely tied to and supportive of the from us than we from them they are initiative to try to settle a positive contributor to our balance of structure. U.S. peace payments. I am not making an argtlmCnt at this the Arab-Israel conflict and bring a Experience should have been the best point for letting the Turks off the hook. lasting peace to the war-torn Middle teacher in making clear the fact that our i am merely pointing out that we may be East. Second, the bill seeks to promote foreign assistance program does not buy asking the impossible, and that they may development aid programs designed to friendship abroad. There is no guarantee not have a government that can make Increase agricultural production in the that recipients of our aid will behave as any .decision. I think it is especially im- poor and near-starvation states of South we think they should, either internally or portant that we keep that in mind so we Asia. Third, the bill is supportive of Sev- in their relations with others. It is wrong do not find ourselves in a position that is eral general foreign policy objectives in- to think of aid in these terms. We can be impractical and illogical and that would eluding the Nixon doctrine and helping hopeful it will have an influence in our cause us to miss our ultimate goal. others help and defend themselves. favor, but we should not be surprised Mr. Chairman, my dear colleagues, the Fourth, the bill is realistic and seeks, in when it does not. What we can hope to gentleman from Illinois (Mr. AN)ERSON) the funds made available for the states achieve through the various assistance was suggesting, as I understand it, is that of the Middle East and South Asia, to undertakings, embodied in this legisla- this program is in such disfavor that we supplement and complement the aid pro- tion and other measures comprising our must turn to all sorts of multilateral pro- grams and financial support of other aid program, is an Improved climate for grams. states rather than supplant and dupli- working on and working out the many Well, as the gentleman-from Iowa (Mr. cate other initiatives. complex issues which directly and in- Gross) knows, whenever a program is in MIDDLE EAST PACKAGE directly involve and affect us all. Re- disfavor, we change the name of the The most important portion of this straint in budgetary considerations is a agency. So I suppose if we come up with foreign aid bill as it relates to the Near commendable characteristic when ap- a name such as "Self-Help for Hard East and South Asia region is the new plied to foreign assistance as well as ex- Pressed American Industry Agency" or part VI, better known as the Middle East penditures in all other Federal categories. something like that, the program will package. But we should not allow our eagerness survive. It has happened enough in the This section authorizes $250 million In to make budgetary cuts obscure the past so I: am not really being facetious. security supporting assistance for Israel rationale of our assistance efforts, the in- The gentleman from Illinois should and Egypt and $77.5 million In security tricacies of their operation and the far- keep in mind that multinational pro- supporting assistance for Jordan. On the reaching value they can have. As we take grams are also under attack. U.N. agen- military side, the bill earmarks $100 mil- care to make the right decisions during ties, which are the normal ones we might lion in military grants and $200 million this unsettling period In our economic wish to utilize, will be under attack be- in military credits for Israel and approx- life, we should not lose sight of the im- cause of the recent deplorable action of imately $95 million in grant military aid portance international considerations the United Nations General Assembly for Jordan. will play in working toward economic permitting spokesmen of the PLO to uti- Mr. Chairman, these figures are siz- stability and an improved atmosphere of line- the General Assembly session and able because of our strong commitment political understanding. have similar recognition in specialized to peace in the Middle East and the high Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- United Nations agencies. degree of prestige and personal stakes man, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman ? Sq we cannot even use the more prac- that our Government has put on the line from Illinois (Mr. DERWINSKI). tical outlets for U.S. aid if we wanted to for the cause of a just Middle East set- (Mr. DERWINSKI asked and was switch from a bilateral program. tlement. I remained convinced -that the given permission to revise and extend his I think it would,be proper in the last Middle East section came out of the remarks.) 2 weeks of a historic Congress if we would Committee on Foreign Affairs with one Mr.. DERWINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I demonstrate diplomatic understanding. underlying theme: We commend the would like to point out two things: First, If, we would give the President and the United States for its considerable efforts Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 'December 10, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -DOUSE for the cause of peace in the Middle East and we support those efforts. i hope that this body reiterates that pledge with its actions on this bill. ISRAEL The costs of the October 1973 war and continued partial mobilization, in addi- tion to its serious inflation, have put se- rious economic dilemmas before the Is- raeli Government. The request of secu- rity supporting assistance for Israel is designed to help directly with Israel's budget and economic crisis and to pro- vide that friendly government with a de- gree of economic strength and stability at a time when It faces important di- lemmas in peace negotiations involving potential risks. . The total $300 million of military aid support being made available to Israel corresponds to the amount available last year in the regular fiscal year 1974 budg- et. Although Israel received some $2.2 billion in the Emergency Assistance Act of .1973 following the October 1973 war, the resupply effort and Israel's changing defense requirements are putting new pressures on its military establishment and are requiring new types of defensive equipment to , protect Israel within changing frontiers. These funds remain crucial to providing for Israel's strength and to enabling Israel to participate in peace talks without jeopardizing its se- curity. EGYPT The security supporting assistance for Egypt is also an important part of this bill and directly related to the crucial support the Egyptian Government has been giving to Secretary Kissinger's dip- lomatic initiatives in the region. Presi- dent Sadat has been a key figure in the Middle East in the last year and his country is the most important Arab state in the area. Several times in the last year President Sadat has gone that extra dis- tance to help us in our efforts. Several times he has put his prestige on the line for the cause of a lasting peace and for causes which may have initially been less popular in other parts of the Arab world. The changes In Egyptian policy dis- played during the last year and Egyptian support for a peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israel conflict are encouraging signs. Under the surface, there exists in Egypt today an increased desire to want to get on with economic and social de- velopment and to find honorable ways of reaching a lasting peace with Israel. The Egyptian economy has been hit hard by years of war and neglect. The cities along the once-important Suez Canal have been leveled by years of cycles of hot, and then sporadic, warfare. The economic aid being made available for Egypt in this bill is designed to strengthen the forces of moderation In the Middle East and give the people of that important country an alternative to further conflict by showing what can be done in a peaceful environment to im- prove the qaulity of life and restore the badly damaged regions of Egypt along the Suez Canal. We are not participating in this effort alone. States of Europe, Japan and, more importantly, some of the oil-rich state of the Persian Gulf are committing bil- lions of dollars to the rebuilding of the Egyptian ,economy. Our efforts are de- signed to complement these other, larger international efforts. The money requested in this bill will provide American technical assistance both for opening of the Suez Canal and for helping restore basic utilities to the cities along the Suez Canal so that the civilian populations that once lived there will return to some semblance of a nor- mal life. This commitment is one to peace and returning the Suez Canal region to normalcy: It Is a fruitful way of trying to consolidate initial steps toward peace and Insuring that what has been accom- plished can be preserved in the coming months, and perhaps years, of negotia- tions that may lie ahead. JORDAN U.S. assistance to and support of the Government of Jordan and the policies of its leader, King Hussein, are also an important part of the Middle East pack- age. The bill provides for some $94.2 mil- lion in grant military aid, $30 million in military credits, and some $77.5 million In economic security supporting assist- ance. Jordan has been supportive of the United States and stood by our initiatives and our policies in the Middle East for many years. Jordan has a small and efficient army that needs some modern equipment to defend itself against neighbors who re= ceive substantial and sophisticated equipment from the Soviet Union. Jor- dan has also an economy that is moving toward self-sufficiency. Our aid is de- signed to improve its small army and to Inject some money into its economy to spur further economic development. The Jordanian economy has come a long way since the days of the civil war in 1970 which left that state in -a shambles. The United States should continue to sup- port current trends in that state. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FUND The Middle East section of the bill also contains a $100 million special require- ments fund which is more closely related to Secretary Kissinger's diplomacy for peace and to our efforts to encourage peaceful attitudes and development where possible and where consistent with the larger foreign policy goals of this country. Although none of the funds made available in this section are to be used until after Congress receives notification and has an opportunity to disapprove possible allocation by concurrent resolu- tion, we do have some indication of how this money might be used. First, we know it will all be used for economic develop- ment purposes. Second, Secretary Kiss- inger has said in testimony that some portion of it may be used in Syria to help rebuild the Qunietra region near.the Golan Heights. Third, up to $6 million will be available to help supplement the United Nations Relief and Works Agency's regular budget which has a huge deficit and permit it to continue-to provide minimum levels of humanitarian aid to needy refugees. Without supple- mental support from the United States H 11543 and. other countries, UNRWA will have to curtail vital services. And, finally, the committee ? report urges that some of the funds might profitably be used to help support some of the existing educational and vocational training institutions on the West Bank and in Gaza. All of these uses represent important Investments in peace and I believe that it is important for the United States to maintain considerable flexibility over these funds even though we must retain the provision stating that the State De- partment must return to Congress to in- dicate how these funds might be al- located. OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE MIDDLE EAST In addition to more regular, annual foreign aid sections which have tradi- tionally helped people in the Middle East including support of educational institu- tions in Israel, Lebanon, and Egypt under the American Schools and Hospitals Abroad program and of Palestinian ref- ugees under the UNRWA United Nations program, this bill contains four other im- portant and new policy statements on the Middle East which deserve particular mention here. First, section 620(p) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, is repealed. This section prohibited aid to Egypt unless it was determined to be in the national interest of the United States. As a, sign of the improved relations be- tween the United States and Egypt, this section is no longer necessary. Such neg- ative statements in this bill are replaced by positive expressions that we hope. United States-Egyptian relations will continue to improve and that Egypt's desire for a peaceful settlement and a lasting peace will continue to be a corner- stone of its foreign policies. Second, in a statement of policy the bill expresses the sense of the Congress that "none of the funds authorized by this act should be provided to any nation which denies its citizens the right or op- portunity to emigrate." The major im- petus' behind the Inclusion of this statement is the continued poor condition of the dwindling Jewish community of Syria. The more than 3,000 Syrian Jews' still :living in that country lead very re- stricted lives and seem to be denied both gainful employment and the right to emigrate. We must hope that within the context of improved relations with Syria that this community will not remain a hopeless pawn but will be given the free choice of leaving or remaining in Syria. If that choice is not offered, any potential offer of aid to Syria would be in serious trouble. , Third, the bill stipulates that none of the funds authorized can be used to fi- nance any equipment or technology promised pursuant to any agreement for nuclear cooperation that might be signed between the United States and Egypt or Israel. With all the problems and tensions involved in the Middle East situation, it would seem that there are several more constructive channels for our energies and limited financial resources which do not present the potential, grave risks of the exchange of nuclear technology with two states which have not signed the Nu- Approved, For Release 2005/06/16: CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 H 11544 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --HOUSE December 10, 1974 clear Nonproliferation Treaty and two gion In the world. The aid funds au- Dr. MORGAN, for the able leadership he states which have been involved in hos- thorized here are modest compared to has provided over many months in bring- tilities so often and so recently. years and decades past, but the funds ing a foreign aid bill to the House floor. A fourth Item In the foreign aid bill, are targeted for areas and projects His task has not been an easy one. which conceivably might have relevance where they will bring the greatest and There were many contentious and diffi- for the Middle East, is the new section quickest results and will help the poor, cult issues with which the committee was 659 on reimbursable development pro- Particular mention. should be made of forced to contend in marking up this grams. This section makes available, up the $50 million in aid being .made avail- legislation. to $2 million to assist the United States able for India. While this amount was Because of Chairman MORGAN'S ability in working with friendly states who do limited by the committee, it does reflect at conciliation and negotiation, this bill not receive development aid. The pur- the improved nature of United States- represents a compromise-in the very pose of this section Is to promote Ameri- Indian relations and our desire for es- best sense of that word. can technology and expertise in states tablishing a better dialog oil all issues Through 12 days of hearings and 15 where governments will and can pay for of mutual concern. India is the largest days of open markup session, the com- technical assistance but where in the state in South Asia and while our aid mittee has labored hard to shape legis- absence of small amounts of funds to programs there will likely never again lation which will meet the concerns of "top off" salaries and expenses of Ameri- reach the high levels they once were, we a majority of the House Of Representa- can experts, the Americans could not get do have an interest in working with In- tives. the valuable contracts. This section will dia in trying to solve some of its serious The legislation will not, of course, help make us more. competitive in dis- economic problems, particularly in the please everyone. There are, indeed, pro- tant countries and facilitate open and agricultural sector. Our legitimate con- visions which I myself opposed in com- fair access to natural resources of inter- cern over India's nuclear, program should mittee and which I wish were not in the est to us. not .prevent us from working with that bill. Taken in its totality, however the SOUTH ASIA state to try to solve the problems of bill is a good one and deserves the sup- In South Asia, the foreign aid bill sup- poverty. This bill supports the idea of a port of this body. ports very different, but nonetheless modest increase in our aid programs to Therefore, I hope my colleagues will important, foreign policy goals. The bill India, a program which was reduced to study the bill and the committee report authorizes close to $235 million, mostly almost nothing during the last 2 years carefully. If there is to be a foreign aid in development loans, for the States of when relations were strained. bill this, year, it cannot be weighed down South Asia. The bill support programs These South Asian country programs with controversial amendments? which for-in descending order of funds made are complemented by small, ongoing either will make a conference with the available-Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, special projects such as the Indus River Senate difficult or invite a Presidential Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, and Nepal. Basin project which is nearing comple-? veto. There is also a small program for the tion and which will receive $14.7 million I need not caution that we are nearing Yemen Arab Republic requested. in this bill, and regional manpower and 'the end of a particularly exhausting- health educational programs. Some Ojf but productive-Congress. In a few short states. Our these technical assistance efforts involve months we will begin consideration of the asameaamountefor theseauthorized efforts in South Asia relate primarily to CENTO countries and others involve a foreign assistance bill for the next sending South Asia students to regional fiscal year. If Members who have amend- and their ng their agricultural production institutions like the American University ments could withhold them until then, and thability to feed themselves. This of Beirut for specialized training. Such I am sure they will find the Committee ti no small task an area shortages, is , con- regional programs are replacing pro.. on Foreign Affairs receptive to working ternately faced with food snd cyclones grams that would bring students to the -with them of implementing their ideas. and occasionally bureaucracies and catlcan- United States. Mr. Chairman, for more than 25 years and properly administer at can- Mr. Chairman, this Foreign Assistance I have annually worked for passage of a not erly foreign aid bill. More than. any other Let t m me give a one one example o of f the kind Act of 19'74 offers in several important time in my experience, passage of the aid of thing our aid will seek to do, namely, respects, a new and challenging set of time this year is essential to the future build up a domestic fertilizer capacity concepts in foreignn aid -and supports of American foreign policy-and in these countries. One ton of nutrient many significant foreign policy goals of succesto wers d peace. fertilizer, for example, will have a mul- this Nation. There were significant at- THE MIDDLE EAST PACKAGE tiplier effect in South Asia over twice tempts made in the drafting of this bill the effect than if that fertilizer were to show strong support for U.S. peace All of us have 'been. pleased by the used in this country. From an economic initiatives in the Middle East, reduce diplomatic efforts of our Secretary of viewpoint, it is far more practical to overall amounts, cut unnecessary grant State and his colleagues to begin the job help provide the States of South Asia military aid programs t,) states which do of defusing tensions in the Middle East, with the equipment and material neces- not face serious external threats, incor- following 'the October war of 1973. sary to increase its domestic fertilizer porate a recognition of a growing con- Let me briefly review the situation at production than it is to ship food from cern in Congress for the human rights of the end of that war: the United States. We should be moving all peoples around the world, especially First, the Arab nations had become in this direction with our aid. The poten- those in states which continue to receive convinced that the United States had tial exists and this makes these develop- substantial U.S. aid and put greater em.- wholly sided with.Israel and that Arab ment loans all the more important. Un- phasic on economic, aid in general and and American objectives could not be fortunately, for the short run, most of agricultural and population aid in par- reconciled; these states will need both economic aid ticular. Second, relations with Europe and for the future and food aid for the I urge my colleagues *to support this Japan were strained because of the oil present. legislation. If we shirk our responsibilty boycott and differences over reaching a Inflation, the fourfold increase in oil on this crucial matter, we are voting "no" settlement in the Middle East; prices and the vagaries of the weather for peace an stability in many regions Third, the Soviet Union had emerged have added several strains in the econ- around the world where we do have as the Arab's apparent best friend and omies of all states in South Asia. Other short- and long-term interests to pre- protector and had gained a strong politi- aid donors are responding to these added serve and promote. cal position on the Middle East; burdens from countries whose cumula- Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield Fourth, Israel, having suffered signifi- tive populations represent a sizable por- 10 minutes to the gentleman from Wis- cant losses, faced an extremely uncertain tion of humanity. It is important for the cousin (Mr. ZABLOCICI) future; and 'United States to work, as best we can (Mr. ZABLOCKI asked and was given Fifth, here at home we all were waiting with the limited aid funds available, with Permission to revise and extend his re- in long, long lines to get gasoline. the World Bank-led aid consortia for marks.) As a result of diplomatic initiatives In these states and provide the material Mr. ZABLOCKI. Mr. Chairman, at the which our Nation took a leading role,. and and technical assistance to promote de- outset I wish to commend the chairman because of the willingness of certain Arab velopment in, perhaps, the poorest re- of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, leaders to accept a central role of the, Approved For Release 2005/06/16 CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 December 1,0, 10.4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE United States in settling the dispute, hopeful steps have been taken toward an ultimate solution. Foreign aid to some of the nations in- volved in the Middle East is an important element in holding the present situation together. It will not insure an agreement in the Middle East, but will help greatly to advance our diplomatic efforts. The bill earmarks $100 million in mili- tary grant aid for Israel; $250 million each to Israel and Egypt for security supporting assistance; and $200 million in military credit sales to Israel. In addi- tion, it creates a special requirements fund of $100 million for Middle East use. Should this bill be defeated and there be no "Middle East package" of aid, the chance for a lasting peace in that region would be considerably jeopardized. I need not remind my colleagues of the potential costs of renewed fighting In the Middle East. By providing foreign aid to countries in that area we are helping to insure against future outbreaks. INDOCHINA AID A similar peace-related situation ex- ists with respect to Indochina aid. In Laos-we have attained a cease-fire and a coalition government that has shown some indications of progress. In Vietnam, the situation currently is one of greatly reduced military activity which has permitted the people of South Vietnam to turn from war to rebuilding their country. In a sense, the conuict with the north has entered a new stage: A battle for the economy of South Vietnam. Barring in- tensified conflict, there is reason to be confident that the people of the south can achieve increased economic develop- ment. For example, this year Vietnam will once again be self-sufficient in rice be- cause harvests have been good in the Mekong Delta. area, next year Vietnam may earn foreign exchange from rice exports-as it did before the Indochina war. In order to sustain South Vietnam's efforts at reconstruction and develop- ment-and ultimately to win the eco- nomic war with the north-it is iieces nary to continue substantial amounts of foreign aid in the form of supporting assistance. Nevertheless, the committee in its de- liberations on this item already has cut the funding request by some $340 mil- lion-from $750 million asked by the executive branch, to $405 million cur- rently programed. Any further cuts-or defeat of this bill-would severely jeopardize chances for an end to the conflict in Southeast Asia. It would be an open invitation to Hanoi to attack the south. The United States would then be faced with the di- lemma of making 'an appropriate re- sponse. SOUTH KOREA I believe the funds in this bill are also important to the cause of peace in Korea. It is common knowledge that an attempt will be made today to cut those funds drastically. Such a move would, in my estimation, be tragically shortsighted. Granted that none of us is attracted to the government of President Park. It has been harsh and repressive in many instances. But it would be folly to so reduce our military aid to South Korea to the point that North Korea would be emboldened to attack or to undertake other kinds of actions which would threaten peace in the Korean Peninsula. Need we remind ourselves that the Government of North Korea is generally 'considered among the most repressive in the world. Where would we gain by cut- ting our aid? How would the cause of human rights be advanced if war ensues? This bill contains about $185 million for military aid to Korea. The entire amount is needed. Attempts to reduce the figure should be turned back. In Cambodia, of course, there is no peace. But the cause of achieving peace will not, I contend, be served by failing to provide needed assistance to the Cam- bodian people. If there is to be a nego- tiated settlement and true peace-as op- posed to a bloodbath and the peace of the dead-the United States must con- tinue to meet its responsibilities to bol- ster the Khmer Republic through pro- viding economic and military aid. How ironic it would be if this body took action prejudicial to Cambodia at the very time that the government's legitimacy had been reaffirmed at the United ' Nations. INCREASING WORLD FOOD PRODUCTION Just as passage of this bill is important to peace in the Middle East, Indochina, and Korea, it is also, in the long run, very significant in the effort to remedy such causes of world unrest and conflict as starvation, disease, ignorance, and poverty. It was my privilege last month to head the delegation from the House which at- tended the World Food Conference in Rome. Although my reactions to that event were mixed, one conclusion emerged clearly: There is a world food shortage which must be addressed by all the world's na- tions if we are to avoid a breakdown of order in many countries--a breakdown which could imperil international sta- bility. In recognition of world food shortages, the committee has authorized $180.3 mil- lion in additional funds for. food and nu- trition. This amount, which is $75 mil- lion less than the administration's re- quest but which increases the current authorization, provides a total of $471.3 million for food and nutrition projects in fiscal year 1975. The answer to starvation must be in- creased production in the food-short countries themselves. The United States no longer has sufficient food supplies to feed the world. The funds in this bill will be used to help the developing world increase its own agricultural output, particularly to bring small farmers-who are in the vast majority-into the economic main- stream. In enacting .the "new directions" in foreign aid represented by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1973, the Congress set I'ii545 in motion an effort to reach the poor, rural majorities of the developing world and to assist, them to grow more food. That action was taken before the di- mensions of the current world food shortage were known. Today the wisdom of congressional action last year is read- ily apparent. But we must intensify our efforts this year with additional funding, as provided in this legislation. CONCLUSION Mr. Chairman, I commend this bill to my colleagues and urge their approval. With peace as our goal-peace in the Middle East, peace in Indochina, world peace-let us vote to provide the funds necessary to conduct effective foreign as- sistance programs in fiscal year 1975. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man., I yield 10 minutes to the gentle- man from Indiana (Mr. DENNis). (Mr. DENNIS asked and was given per- mission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. DENNIS. Mr. Chairman, I take this time because I am persuaded that the issues in this bill are important and that this is one of those occasions, al- ways difficult for this House, when we ought to make the effort to employ poli- tics In the higher meaning of statecraft rather than in its more familiar aspect of counting noses in the precincts. I am no great and good friend of for- eign aid and there are aspects of the bill now before us which fail to arouse any great enthusiasm in me. There are Mem- bers of this body, such as my distin- guished friend, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Gross), who are always and for- ever and without exception against for- eign aid in any amount and under any circumstances and in all its forms. These gentlemen have their considered reasons for their point of view, they are con- sistent, and I respect them and their position. I am not myself of this school, but neither am I a big spender by nature or belief at home or abroad. I consider for- eign aid legitimate, not when employed as a scattergun discharging alleged gen- eral good will but when, and only when, employed as a sharpshooter's rifle, aimed and. targeted at some specific foreign policy advantage for the clear benefit of this great Nation and its great and pa- tient common people whom we repre- sent, and who pay the taxes and who foot the bill. There is another type of Member in this body with whom I find myself in, complete and total disagreement on this particular subject. Unlike my friend, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Gross), they are not always opposed to foreign aid for economic, financial, and nationalistic American reasons. Somewhat like my- self, although they favor aid more gen- erally than I do, they are sometimes for aid and sometimes opposed to aid; but these people, to my way of thinking, are governed in their viewpoint less by American national interest than by their view of the advancement of social goals and political and economic policies as they see them from their own some- what doctrinaire point of view. These are the people who do not want to buy Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 H 11546 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?- HOUSE December 10, 1974 chrome from Rhodesia even though we need Rhodesian chrome. They are the people who do not want to aid Chile or South Korea or South Vietnam or Cambodia or the former Government of Portugal, not on the basis of our own national interest in these cases but be- cause these are dictatorial governments and, more significantly, because they are dictatorial governments of the right. These people, most of them, are willing to help Israel even to the extent of de- nuding the United States of vital military equipment. Yet they tend to boggle at the extension of some moderate aid to Egypt or to Jordan or, under some cir- cumstances, perhaps to Syria, as a neces- sary means of maintaining a balance which prudence would suggest is abso- lutely essential to the maintenance of peace. And so far as I know, these people have made no serious effort in the last 20 years to attempt to use the leverage which we have with Israel to try to make a settlement of the exceedingly difficult and now terribly and unnecessarily ex- acerbated problem of the Palestinian refugees. Again some of these same people say that Turkey is a military aggressor- forgetting, It appears, that the crisis was precipitated by a rightwing dictatorship in Greece-and that, therefore, we must second-guess the Secretary of State and the President of the United States as to the best method of bringing about peace In the embattled island of Cyprus. Mr. Chairman, despite my many reser- vations about this bill, I am going to sup- port it, if It is not loaded down by too many crippling amendments, as a needed and necessary tool of American foreign policy; but I strongly object to the dou- ble standard with which too many of us approach these vital problems. I implore my colleagues, in the name of world peace, to give the executive branch the necessary tools to do its constitutional job; and I beg them not to play politics on this floor with the fortunes and, it may be, even with the lives, of your con- stituents and mine. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. MILLER). (Mr. MILLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. MILLER. Mr. Chairman, I want to take just a couple minutes at this time to inform the committee that when we arrive at the amending process of H.R. 17234, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974, that I plan to offer an amend- ment. That amendment will do one thing. It will allow us, the United States, to bar- ter with nations that want our foreign assistance. We today have our own prob- lems within this country. We have a short supply of many strategic metals. We are using our natural resources and, as a matter of fact, we are using about 35 per- cent of the world's natural resources with only about 7 percent of the world's popu- lation. By the year 2000, on the basis of the known reserves that we have today in the United States, we will be out of 11 of our 13 major strategic metals. The main purpose is to show that we can barter and have something coming toward our shores for the foreign assist- ance that we give to the other nations. Since 1946 we have allowed about $158 billion to flow from oui shores and it is time we received something back in turn, which will be the natural resources and the strategic metals that we so badly need In order to keep this industrialized Nation of ours rolling beyond the year 2000. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman., I have no,further requests for time. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chair- man, I have no "further requests for time. The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the Clerk will now read the bill by titles. The Clerk read as follows:: .Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Foreign Assistance Act of 1974". TITLE I-MIDDLE EAST PEACE ASSISTANCE TO THE M1111112 EAST SEc. 2. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 Isamended by adding at the.end thereof the following new part: "PART VI "SEC. 901. STATEMENT OF POLICY.-The Con- gress recognizes that a peaceful and lasting resolution of the devisive issues that have contributed to tension. and conflict between nations in the Middle East is essential to the security of the United States and the cause of world peace. The Congress declares and finds that the United States can and should play a constructive role in securing a just and durable peace in the Middle East by facilitating increased understanding between the Arab nations and Israel, and by assisting the nations in the area in their efforts to achieve economic progress and political sta- bility, which are the essential foundations for a just and durable peace. It is the sense of Congress that United States assistance programs in the Middle East should be de- signed to promote mutual respect and -seta- rity among the nations in the area and to foster a climate conducive to increased eco- nomic development, thereby contributing to a community of free, secure, and prospering nations in the Middle East. "It is further the sense of Congress that none of the funds authorized. by the Act should be provided to any nation which denies its citizens the right or opportunity to emigrate. "SEC. 902. ALLOCATIONS-(a) Of the funds appropriated to carry out chapter :2 of part II of this Act, during the fiscal year 1975 up to $200,000,000 may be made available for military assistance- in the Middle East, of which not less than $100,000,000 shall be made available for Israel. "(b) Of the funds appropriated to carry out chapter 4 of part II of this Act, during the fiscal year 1975 up to $577,500,000 may be made available for security supporting as- sistance, in the Middle East, of which not less than $250,000,000 shall be made available for Israel and not less than $250,000;,000 shall be made available for Egypt. "(c) Of the aggregate ceiling -on credits and guaranties established by section 91(b) of the Foreign Military Sales Act, during the fiscal year 1975 up to $230,000;000 shall be available for countries in the Middle East, of which not less than $200,000,000 shall be made available for Israel. "SEC. 903. (a) SPECIAL REQUIREMEnTS FUND. -There are authorized to be appropriated to the President for the fiscal year 1975 not to exceed $1.00,000,000 to furnish assistance under part I of this Act to meet special re- quirements arising from time to time in car.. ryingout?the purposes of this part, in ad- dition to funds otherwise -available for such purposes. The funds authorized to be ap- propriated by this section shall be available for use by the President for assistance au- thorized by such part in accordance with the provisions applicable to the furnishing of such assistance. Such funds are authorized to remain available until expended. "(b) The President may only obligate or expend, for each foreign country, or inter.. national organization, funds authorized un- der this section- "(1) after he reports to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate concerning (A.) the name of such foreign country or inter- national organization, (B) the amount of such funds to be made available to such country or organization, and (C) the pur- pose for which such funds are to be made available to such country or .organization; and (2.) unless the Congress, within thirty legislative days after receiving any report under paragraph (1), adopts a concurrent resolution stating In substance that it does not favor the provisions of the report pro- vided by clauses (A), (B), -and (C) of para- graph (1). "(c) Of the amount authorized under sub- section (a), not less than $6,000,000 shall con- stitute a contribution by the United States toward the settlement of the deficit of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Middle East, if the President determines that a reasonable num- ber of other countries will contribute a fair share toward the settlement of such deficit within a -reasonable period of time After the date of enactment of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974. In determining such fair share, the President shall take into consideration the economic position of each such country. Such $6,000,000 shall be in addition to any other contribution to such Agency by the United States pursuant to any other provi- sion of law." PROHIBITIONS AGAINST FURNISHING ASSISTANCE SEC. 3. Section 620(p) of the Foreign As- sistance Act-of 1961 is repealed. :NUCLEAR POWERPLANTS -Sec. 4. None of the funds authorized by this Act maybe used to finance the construc- tion of, the operation or maintenance of, or the supply of fuel for any nuclear power- plant in Israel or Egypt, which has been ap- proved under an agreement for cooperation between the United States and either such country. Mr. MORGAN (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that title I be considered as read, printed in the RECORD, and open to amendment. The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Penn- sylvania? There was no objection. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise. The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore, Mr..MCFALL, having assumed the chair, Mr. PRICE of Illinois, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 17234) to amend the Foreign As- sistance Act of 1961, and for other pur- poses, had come to no resolution THE TRADE BILL (MT. ADDABBO asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Approved For Release 2005/06/16 : CIA-RDP79-00957A000100020022-4