9. On 12 September, after having heard a statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Laos, the members of the Sub-Committee left United Nations Headquarters in New York for Laos. On 15 September they arrived at Vientiane, where they met members of the Government. On 16 September, the members of the Sub-Committee were received by His Royal Highness the Prince Regent and met informally with the Liaison Committee established by the Government of Laos. This Committee consisted of the following members: Mr. Inpeng Suryadhay, Secretary of State for Education Mr. Nouphat Chounramany, Deputy for Khammouane Lt. Col. Kouprasith Abhay, Director of National Defence Maj. Sakoun Sananikone President Member Member Member Member Member 10. During the ensuing two weeks the Sub-Committee held consultations with the Liaison Committee, from which it received various documents and sought and obtained a number of clarifications. On 30 September a working party of the Sub-Committee, made up of General Ahrens, Mr. Barattieri and Mr. Aoki, the Alternate Representative of Japan, and accompanied by members of the Secre tariat, proceeded to Sam Neua. It returned to Vientiane on 3 October, some of its members having also visited Sam Teu. On 7 October, a working group composed of General Ahrens, Mr. Barattieri, Mr. Ben Ammar and Mr. Aoki, with members of the Secretariat, made a visit to Luang Prabang, returning to Vientiane on 8 October. 11. On 10 October, the Sub-Committee, being of the opinion that it had received the essential basic information for its fact-finding mission, decided-after an exchange of views with the representatives of the four Council Members in New York-to return to New York to prepare a report to the Security Council. Its members felt, however, that it was advisable to leave behind at Vientiane two alternate representatives on the Sub-Committee with appropriate secretariat. The said alternates would answer any request for clarification and supply any additional information which might be required by the Sub-Committee in the writing of the report. Furthermore, they would give information of material change in the situation if occasion arose. 12. On 13 October the Chairman and the representatives of Argentina, Italy and Tunisia, together with the Principal Secretary, left Vientiane for New York by air. On 21 October, they resumed meetings in New York and commenced preparation of the Sub-Committee's report to the Security Council. The additional information received up to 26 October from the alternate representatives remaining in Vientiane has been used in this report. On 3 November, the Sub-Committee approved the present report for submission to the Security Council. 13. Statements made by members of the Security Council on the nature of the functions entrusted to the Sub-Committee under the terms of the resolution adopted by the Security Council on 7 September 1959 were carefully considered by the Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee also had the benefit, prior to its departure for Laos on 12 September, of having been made aware of the views of the representatives of the four countries on the Security Council on this subject. The members of the Sub-Committee continued consideration of this question after their arrival in Vientiane on 15 September. 14. From statements made before the Security Council and from the nature of the action taken by the Council it was apparent that the Sub-Committee had been established as a subsidiary organ of the Security Council under the provisions of Article 29 of the Charter for the purpose of providing the Council with further information relevant to the request submitted by the Government of Laos. "Mr. Ben Ammar had not yet arrived in Laos. Ante, doc. 464. [Footnote in source text.] 15. The representative of Italy, member of the Sub-Committee and President of the Security Council, in summarizing the views of the representatives of the four member countries made before the Council, recalled the opinions expressed before the Council and discussed cases which might be regarded as precedents in the practice of the Security Council for the work of the Sub-Committee. He said that the Security Council resolution implied that the Sub-Committee should look into the documents and further statements and should collect information. He emphasized the distinction between "inquiry” and “investigation", pointing out that it was a basic one for the Sub-Committee. It was clear from the nature of the resolution that the Sub-Committee had to confine itself strictly to an inquiry, which meant "fact-finding". That implied, the President commented, that it must receive information on the facts from the Government concerned, rather than seek facts itself on its own initiative. He noted that the Sub-Committee should not make recommendations. 16. At this stage of its work, the Sub-Committee also examined the question of what its attitude should be in case information or evidence were to be offered by a Government other than the Government of Laos. It decided that the terms of the resolution of the Security Council would enable the Sub-Committee to accept such information or evidence if it were offered. 17. From the outset of its work in Laos the Sub-Committee as a procedural sub-organ of the Security Council, established under Article 29 of the Charter, was fully aware of the limitations which this status imposed upon its activities. It was thus not within the competence of the Sub-Committee to concern itself with the substance of the issues involved in the situation which had given rise to the appeal of the Laotian Government, nor to undertake any steps designed to influence the course of events to which the Laotian Government had referred. As interpreted by the Sub-Committee, its mandate from the Security Council was not a request to investigate the charge of aggression made in the note of 4 September, or to come to any conclusions or judgment concerning its validity. Its task was rather that of assisting the Security Council in bringing together a factual account of these events, drawn from such sources as could be made available to the Sub-Committee. 18. The Sub-Committee wishes to point out that these sources of information were limited to those statements made before the Security Council and the Sub-Committee at United Nations Headquarters, to documents provided to it there and to the information made available to it during the visit of the SubCommittee to Laos. The documents provided to the Sub-Committee at United Nations Headquarters include a letter dated 6 September 1959 addressed to the President of the Security Council by the Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam. Since no offer to submit further information was made by the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam, the Sub-Committee therefore directed its inquiries toward obtaining from the Laotian authorities the detailed information which they saw fit to provide and which in the Sub-Committee's opinion would be of assistance to the Council in its consideration of the Laotian appeal. 19. The Sub-Committee considered that the general definition of subjects which could be covered in its inquiry was determined by the terms of the Laotian note of 4 September. The main points of these terms may be summarized as follows: crossing of the Laotian frontier by foreign troops since 16 July 1959; engagement, by these troops, in military actions against the garrison units of the Royal Army along the Northeastern frontier; dependence of attacking forces for reinforcement and supplies of food and munitions from outside the country; participation of elements of the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam in the attacks, particularly that of 30 August. SUMMARY 91. The Sub-Committee, through the study of the statements made and the documents submitted before the Security Council and those submitted to it by Annex 2 to U.N. doc. S/4236. "Ante, doc. 461. the Royal Laotian Government, from the hearings of many witnesses held in Vientiane, Sam Neua, Sam Teu and Luang Prabang, by the visits made to the northern and northeastern Provinces, considers it useful to make the following summary concerning the appeal of the Royal Laotian Government of 4 September 1959, and the mandate entrusted to it by the resolution of the Security Council of 7 September 1959 (S/4216): 92. The Sub-Committee desires to recall that the members of the Security Council during the two meetings of 7 September 1959, expressed the view that the situation in Laos at the time was fraught with danger." 93. According to the documents presented to the Sub-Committee by the Laotian authorities it appears that, especially since 16 July 1959, military actions have taken place on Laotian territory against Laotian army posts and units. According to the same documents these actions increased progressively, reaching their maximum intensity between 30 August and the middle of September, particularly in the Province of Sam Neua, along the River Ma and in the area of Sam Teu. 94. According to the document of the Laotian Government, presented to the Sub-Committee on 15 October 1959," the military situation especially in the two provinces of Sam Neua and Phong Saly appears to reflect a regression after 15 September, and the general scope of the military actions has taken the characteristics of guerrilla activity, scattered practically throughout the territory of the Kingdom. 95. Generally speaking, the Sub-Committee considers that although there were actions of different scope and magnitude, all of them-throughout the four periods (from 16 July to 11 October) were of a guerrilla character. 96. From the statements of the Laotian authorities, and from those of some witnesses, it appears, however, that certain of these hostile operations must have had a centralized co-ordination. 97. Practically all witnesses (forty out of forty-one) stated that the hostile elements received support from the territory of the D.R.V.N." consisting mainly of equipment, arms, ammunition, supplies, and the help of political cadres. The same emerges from the official Laotian documents submitted and from some of the material exhibits. 98. Hostile elements seemed centred around former members of the U.C.P.L." previously integrated in 1957, the 2nd Battalion of Pathet-Lao, which deserted from the Plaine des Jarres on 11 May 1959, and sections of the frontier minorities (Thais, Meus and a few Khas). According to a document presented to the Sub-Committee by the Laotian Government, participation of regular D.R.V.N. army units were reported during the attacks of the River Ma area on 30 August." The Laotian Government states in another document presented to the SubCommittee on 15 October 1959, that after 15 September 1959, the D.R.V.N. units re-crossed the border into North Viet-Nam, excepting those who occupied the section of Laotian territory between the left bank of the River Ma and the frontier.15 Witnesses reported that in certain cases there had been participation of armed elements with ethnic Viet-Namese characteristics, but they did not identify them as belonging to North Viet-Namese regular army units. The ensemble of information submitted to the Sub-Committee did not clearly establish whether there were crossings of the frontier by regular troops of the D.R.V.N. 99. No information or witnesses were offered to the Sub-Committee from the opposing side. 10 See U.N. docs. S/PV.847 and 848. 472. UNITED STATES ENDORSEMENT OF THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT ON THE SITUATION IN LAOS: Reply Made by the Secretary of State (Herter) to a Question Asked at a News Conference, November 12, 19591 2 I think that on the whole, considering the facilities that the subcommittee had, it made a very objective and good report. As you know, one paragraph-I think it was paragraph 97 of that report— referred particularly to the witnesses who had been interviewed, all of whom, or 40 out of 41 of whom, had testified to the effect that the Pathet Lao or enemy groups that the witnesses had come in touch with had received their supplies, equipment, logistical assistance, and the help of political cadres, from across the border. THE PHILIPPINES 473. UNITED STATES ACTION ON THE PHILIPPINE "OMNIBUS" CLAIMS: Announcement Issued by the Department of State, August 4, 1959 1a The United States on August 4 replied to the Philippine Government's "omnibus" claims. The reply was contained in a note 2a handed to Philippine Ambassador Carlos P. Romulo by the Acting Secretary of State. The note also replied to Philippine claims presented separately regarding U.S. coconut-oil and sugar-processing taxes. The Acting Secretary presented to Ambassador Romulo a check for $23,862,751, representing final satisfaction of the Philippine claim arising from the revaluation of the dollar in 1934. The claims of the Philippine Government to which the note replies were submitted to the U.S. Government during the period JanuaryApril 1955. Since then they have been the subject of the most exhaustive and sympathetic study by the agencies concerned, as a result of which the United States has informed the Republic of the Philippines that: 3 1. The United States Government will, at the next regular session of the Congress and in connection with the legislative program for fiscal year 1961, request appropriate legislation enabling the settlement of the Philippine claim for payment of additional war-damage compensation in accordance with the Philippine Rehabilitation Act of The reply printed here is taken from p. 784 of the Department of State Bulletin, Nov. 30, 1959, reprint of Department of State press release No. 792. Supra. 2 1a Department of State press release No. 566 (text as printed in the Department of State Bulletin, Aug. 24, 1959, pp. 279–280). 2 Not printed. 3 A bill (H.R. 12078) with this intent was reported by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs to the Committee of the Whole June 27, 1960. No further action on the bill was taken by the 86th Congress. 1946 (Public Law 370, 79th Congress). The amount of $73 million, according to the records of the War Damage Commission," reflects the statutory maximum of such unpaid private claims authorized by the Philippine Rehabilitation Act of 1946. 2. The United States is prepared to discuss in detail with the Philippine Government possible adjustments of the amount owed by the Philippines under the Romulo-Snyder Agreement of November 6, 1950.6 3. In view of the fragmentary and general nature of evidence submitted in support of the Philippine claim for reimbursement of expenses incurred in connection with the Recovered Personnel Division, the United States is willing to consider any further evidence in support of the claim that the Philippine Government might wish to make available. 4. With respect to the remaining 13 claims formally presented by the Philippine Economic Mission of 1955 and the 2 presented separately requesting refunds of the payments of United States coconutoil and sugar-processing taxes, the United States considers these claims are invalid. The United States Government has examined exhaustively all of the arguments and evidence submitted in support of each of these claims. When it concluded that it was under no legal obligation, the United States Government further considered the claims in an effort to determine whether there might exist any basis for their approval as a matter of equity. The most careful and sympathetic study led the United States to the conclusion that none of the rejected claims warranted approval on this basis. They have thus been finally rejected. The United States has noted that most of the claims submitted deal with payments to the Philippine veterans who served in the United States Armed Forces or as guerrillas during World War II. From the end of that war through 1958 payments to Philippine veterans and dependents as well as survivors by the U.S. Veterans Administration totaled about $700 million. These payments are continuing. They are made to approximately 130,000 individuals in the Philippines each month and currently amount to some $60 million annually. In addition, payments made by the United States for arrears in pay, redemption of guerrilla currency, and other matters have totaled approximately $250 million. LIST OF OMNIBUS CLAIMS 4 1. Import Duties and Other Customs Charges 2. Claim Under Executive Order No. 227 Approved Apr. 30, 1946; 60 Stat. 128 (text in A Decade of American Foreign Policy: Basic Documents, 1941-1949, pp. 865-868). The ninth (and final) semiannual report of the Commission was transmitted to the President Mar. 26, 1951. The Commission (established under title I of the Philippine Rehabilitation Act cited above), whose members were confirmed by the Senate May 22, 1946, terminated its services effective Mar. 31, 1951; see the Department of State Bulletin, June 2, 1946, p. 955, and ibid., Apr. 16, 1951, pp. 618-619. TIAS 2151; 1 UST 765; 122 UNTS 63. 'Issued by President Sergio Osmeña of the Philippines Oct. 28, 1944. |