Since the whole of Southeast Asia is in imminent danger, the Mutual Security Program for next year includes $611 millions for military assistance to that area. Substantial amounts are included in this sum for Indochina and for continued help to prepare the Chinese armies on Formosa to resist Communist aggression. The balance will be used in the Philippines and other countries in the area where Communist minorities are a severe threat to internal security.

Direct military aid is also planned for Latin America. The comparatively small figure of $62 millions in military assistance for our neighbors to the South reflects the fact that there is no immediate. threat of Communist aggression from abroad. Our military assistance there is to help them play a larger role in the collective defense of the Western Hemisphere.

The direct military assistance and related defense support aspects of the Mutual Security Program which I have been describing account for 90 percent of the funds required for the coming year.

THE NEED FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

I turn now to the technical and economic assistance activities of the program in the Near East, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. While these constitute less than 10 percent of the funds, their significance cannot be overstated.

There is greater discontent among the peoples in the underdeveloped areas than there ever has been in the past. We understand and sympathize with their demands for economic and social progress. Their desires for a change from the miserable conditions of the status quo are fanned by intense national feelings. Unless we provide technical and economic assistance, and do it promptly, to help these people begin to improve their conditions, there is serious danger that they will fall into the trap of the shrewd and ruthless Communist machine which is cynically promising quick cures for age-old ills. This would be just as grave a blow to our security as if they fell to communism through armed attack.

Without technical and economic assistance in places such as Indochina and Formosa, the effectiveness of our military assistance would be greatly impaired. Without technical and economic assistance to new nations recently emerged from colonialism, we cannot hope for political stability and economic progress. Stability in the underdeveloped areas is necessary to maintain a steady flow of materials so badly needed by the free world.

The technical and economic-assistance activities of the Mutuel Security Program are based on the principle of "first things first." In areas where as high as 70 percent of the people suffer from hunger, disease, or illiteracy, these fundamental problems must be tackled before economic development can progress far enough. Expanding trade and industrialization will follow of their own accord from these beginnings.

Our assistance goes, insofar as possible, to the people directly. Our representatives go out into the fields and the villages where they can work with the people themselves. Where we work with governments, it is primarily to help them build stable political and social institutions and the most essential public services which can bring immediate, tangible benefits. We are actively supporting land-reform

movements, and the establishment of free-trade unions, farm-credit institutions, local public-health services, and schools.

The fact that this work is done in non-industrialized societies does not mean that it can be carried out successfully on a shoestring basis. Our experts in the villages and on the farms must be backed up with adequate supplies and equipment. In some instances, direct shipments of commodities are necessary to tide countries over critical periods until our assistance projects have begun to take hold.

SUBSTANTIAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FOR INDIA, PAKISTAN AND IRAN

In nations like India, Pakistan, and Iran, our economic and technical assistance programs are of substantial size to meet the needs of an urgent situation. If there were no danger of internal subversion, we could probably carry out programs of technical cooperation in these countries at a slower pace, and would not have to speed them up with considerable quantities of equipment and supplies from the United States to support the work of the experts. But we do not have the time. We cannot afford to risk doing it the slow way in these areas.

COOPERATIVE BASIS OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

The technical and economic assistance activities are carried out with other countries on a cooperative basis. We are not carrying the load by ourselves. We are helping other nations to help themselves. As the effects of our assistance increase, as the countries benefit from them, they will take on more and more of the work, and our share in the enterprise will decrease. We have found this to be the case in Latin America, where technical assistance has been under way for 10 years.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO BE FINANCED THROUGH LOANS

It has been our steadfast policy that the bulk of the funds required for the ultimate development of the underdeveloped areas must come from private investment, supplemented by loans from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Export-Import Bank. But until local economies are raised and conditions stabilized to the point where they can attract capital from these sources, we must be prepared in some instances to make special grants for development.

FUNDS REQUESTED FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

The total amount of technical and economic assistance provided for programs in Southeast Asia under the Mutual Security Agency, including support for defense efforts, is $258 millions. For point 4 programs in South Asia, the Near East, Africa, and Latin America, under the Technical Cooperation Administration, $227 million is requested. An additional $141 million is requested for refugee relief and resettlement programs in Israel and the Arab States.

I regard technical and economic assistance as an investment absolutey essential to the attainment of a free, prosperous, and expanding

world economy. Development in these areas will provide raw materials for the continued growth of our own economy and those of other free nations. It will give hope to these people for a better life in a free society and should, in time, strengthen the nations of these areas so that they can in the future, without special help from us, be self-reliant members of the free world.

I am convinced that the Mutual Security Program in all its parts is sound, practical, and absolutely essential.

EFFECT OF ANY CUT ON THE PROGRAM

There are many people, both in Congress and among the general public, who are saying that this program can and should be cut drastically. I am aware that very early in the hearings I am going to be asked the direct question "Can this program be cut and, if so, how much?"

Of course this program can be cut-any program can be cut. I believe, however, that the important question is not "Can it be cut?" The real question is: "What will be the result if it is cut?"

I am convinced that any decision to cut the Mutual Security Program is a decision to reduce the strength which is being built in the free world for our common defense against the threat of the Kremlin. A substantial cut would gravely impair our own security.

I share with you a profound concern that our expenditures should not be one dollar greater than is necessary. For that reason this request has been rigorously held to the minimum necessary. It is not padded. If it were, I could not defend it with the conviction as I am doing today. The sums requested are large because they reflect the size of the peril and the dimensions of the need.

I have already stated my belief that this program is less costly than any other means by which we might seek to ensure our security. There are additional benefits which cannot be measured in terms of dollars and cents. Security is not only in steel and guns. Security is in men. Men fly planes, men shoot guns, men fight in tanks. I do not believe that we should reserve to the young men of this country the exclusive privilege of fighting for freedom. They are entitled to have well-equipped allies.

MUTUAL SECURITY PROGRAM IS ESSENTIAL

I want to state to you my deep conviction that this Mutual Security Program is an essential investment in the security and destiny of our country. Through it we seek to deter aggression and prevent another world war. Through it we provide our citizens with allies, ready and able to fight with us for our common freedoms. Through it we help assure the supplies of raw materials essential to our economic life. Through it we enhance the cause of freedom, help less fortunate peoples to free themselves from the slavery of hunger and disease, and lay the foundations for a world in which peace, freedom, and prosperity may endure.

There are moments in history when acts of omission are as fatal as acts of commission. In our own lifetime we have seen the terrible results of hesitation. This is a moment when we can move forward in giving inspiration and confidence to free men the world over, and

carry through the constructive programs for which your committees have been so largely responsible. If we hesitate now, much of what we have done will be undone and the barbaric tyranny of the Kremlin will spread. Although the outlook is not completely clear and there are grave tasks ahead, with courage and determination, we can move steadily toward our goal-a strong, united free world.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Harriman.
The Secretary of State. Secretary Acheson, come around.

Let us have quiet, please. If we don't have quiet we will have to vacate the room except for the committees.

All right, Mr. Secretary.

STATEMENT BY HON. DEAN ACHESON, SECRETARY OF STATE

Secretary ACHESON. Senator Connally, Mr. Richards, members of the three committees, The Mutual Security Program for 1953 is of cardinal importance to our national interest and security, and I welcome this opportunity to appear before you in its behalf.

It seems fair to say that there is no substantial disagreement with the basic policy represented in this legislation.

The American people have clearly rejected both isolationism and preventive war as self-defeating courses of action. Instead, our national policy, which commands strong agreement and support among our people, is directed toward increasing the strength and unity for the free world, as a safeguard of peace and freedom.

The program which properly bears the name of "mutual security" is one of the principal means by which this national policy is translated into action.

What the Mutual Security Program represents is our share of the total effort which is now going on, to reduce the weakness which stands as a temptation to aggression, and to build instead a strong and confident structure of peace.

It

Mr. Harriman has just discussed in full and in some detail the projection of this program for 1953, which you now have before you. is not my purpose to repeat what he has just said. I want to assure you, however, that I adopt and endorse what he has said, and I profoundly believe in the program he has presented.

In my short presentation this morning, what I should like to put before you are some of the factors which seem to me to be essential to an understanding of the more far-reaching and enduring side of this Mutual Security Program.

Mr. Harriman has dealt with the urgent necessity for providing for defense, and for supporting the defense efforts of our friends and allies. There are four other points to which I should like to draw your attention, in your consideration of this program.

EUROPEAN UNITY AND UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE

First of all, I wish to point out the importance of those moments in history when things are fluid, and when great advances can be made which will endure for centuries and greatly influence the lives of generations to come. This is one of those moments in Europe.

Each cataclysm which has swept Europe from the wars of Napoleon to the wars of Hitler-has left Europe in a molten state, with great possibilities for change-destructive or creative.

American foreign policy since the war has been based on an understanding of this fact. This period of our foreign policy has been one of the most constructive in the history of the Republic. We have been working with the vast new forces which are developing in Europeforces of unity and cohesion. We have come to the point when it is possible to put aside destructive rivalries which have divided Europe for centuries. In their stead, there can be created a unified Europe which will give enduring and underlying strength, not only to the immediate task of creating a defense force, but to the European community itself. For an effective defense force cannot be merely a military organization. It must be founded upon and grow out of the living and vibrant community.

This is what we have been working for. This has been the consistent goal of the Congress, the administration and the American people since the war.

What I want to stress is that we are approaching the culmination of this effort. In the past 2 or 3 years tremendous steps have been taken. It is only necessary to mention the organization of NATO itself, the steps toward the Schuman plan, toward the European defense community, and toward bringing Germany back into close relations with Western Europe.

The dramatic events of recent weeks cannot fail to excite any student of history. The fact that within a period of 10 days both the French Parliament and the German Bundestag approved the revolutionary step of merging their armed forces with those of Italy and the Benelux countries was a political event absolutely unique in the last several centuries. And equally striking is the fact that the proposal for the European defense community contains provisions for early action toward a constitutional federation of Europe.

Who would have thought, even 2 years ago, that we could by now have come even this close to seeing Germany and France going along the road together?

These things can be brought to fulfillment now. If we lose this momentum-if they are not accomplished now-they may not be accomplished for a long time to come.

In a large measure, it depends upon what we do. This legislation which we are considering here is of vital importance in bringing about the larger creation and all its interrelated parts.

The relation of the 1952 military plans to the arrangements with Germany, to the development of NATO, to the creation of a European defense community which looks forward to political integration—these are all intimately interwoven with one another.

If we succeed we will have a force which will underpin strength in Europe for generations. If not, we will have an inherent weakness in Europe which will have to be kept propped up—if indeed we can keep it propped up.

This country-the American people has done as much as, and perhaps more than, any other country to bring this about. Now is the time to put it through. If it is not put through now then the things we have talked about for the past 5 years may become impossible of achievement.

96968-52——2