The United States accordingly believes that the Force should be continued for another year. This, of course, means money. The Secretary General has proposed an estimated budget of $19,384,800 for the purpose of continuing the Force in 1961.13 The Advisory Committee has concurred in this estimate, with the suggestion that every effort be made to keep expenditures within a target total of $19 million.14 The United States supports in general the estimates of the Secretary General but prefers the budget level proposed by the Advisory Committee. The United States Delegation formally proposes that the total of the estimate be reduced to $19 million. Mr. Chairman, my Government has recognized from the beginning that financing UNEF represents a financial burden on those countries least able to pay. It is for this reason that it has always offered voluntary contributions over and above its assessed share for the support of UNEF. This year the United States Government is prepared once again to make an effort to lighten the load for those least able to pay and on whom a burden is placed. To this end we are prepared to offer $1,800,000 as a voluntary contribution over and above our regular assessed share for financing UNEF. This offer is, naturally, subject to approval by the Congress of the United States.15 The United States makes this offer on the understanding that it-and other voluntary contributions-will be used to make reductions of up to 50% in the assessments of those members having a limited capacity to pay. It is our earnest hope, Mr. Chairman, that other members may also find it possible to make voluntary contributions. We would be particularly pleased if the Soviet Union were to do so as concrete proof of its willingness to take positive action in the interests of peace and security. Mr. Chairman, no delegation is more aware than mine of our financial difficulties, but we feel that UNEF is worth paying for. If peace and security are not worth sacrificing for, then nothing else is. I call upon all members to do their honest share to the limit of their capacity. 13 See U.N. doc. A/4396. 1 See U.N. doc. A/4409. 15 See sec. 204 (b) of the Mutual Security Act of 1960; post, doc. 392. 213. THE UNITED NATIONS EMERGENCY FORCE-AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENSES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1961: Resolution 1575 (XV), Adopted by the U.N. General Assembly, December 20, 1960 16 The General Assembly, 17 Recalling its resolutions 1089 (XI) of 21 December 1956, 1151 (XII) of 22 November 1957,18 1337 (XIII) of 13 December 1958 19 and 1441 (XIV) of 5 December 1959,20 Having considered the observations made by Member States on the financing of the United Nations Emergency Force, Having examined the budget estimates for the Force submitted by the Secretary-General for the year 1961 21 and the observations and recommendations thereon of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,22 Having noted with satisfaction that special financial assistance has been pledged voluntarily towards the expenditures for the Force in 1961, Considering that it is desirable to apply voluntary contributions of special financial assistance in such a manner as to reduce the financial burden on those Governments which have the least capacity to contribute towards the expenditures for maintaining the Force, 1. Authorizes the Secretary-General to expend up to a maximum of $19 million for the continuing operation of the United Nations Emergency Force during 1961; 2. Decides to assess the amount of $19 million against all States Members of the United Nations on the basis of the regular scale of assessments, subject to the provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4 below; 3. Decides further that the voluntary contributions pledged prior to 31 December 1960, including those already announced and referred to in the fourth preambular paragraph above, shall be applied, at the request of the Member State concerned made prior to 31 March 1961, to reduce by up to 50 per cent: (a) The assessment that the Member States which were admitted during the fifteenth session of the General Assembly are required to pay for the financial year 1961 in accordance with Assembly resolution 1552 (XV) of 18 December 1960; 23 (b) The assessment of all other Member States receiving assistance during 1960 under the Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance, commencing with those States assessed at the minimum of 0.04 per 19 U.N. General Assembly Official Records, Fifteenth Session, Supplement No. 16 (A/4684), p. 50. This resolution, sponsored by the representatives of Canada, Denmark, India, Norway, Sweden, and Yugoslavia, was adopted by a vote of 50 (including the U.S.) to 8, with 27 abstentions. 17 Text in American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1956, pp. 702-703. 18 Text ibid., 1957, pp. 1012–1013. cent and then including, in order, those States assessed at the next highest percentages until the total amount of the voluntary contributions has been fully applied; 4. Decides that, if Member States do not avail themselves of credits provided for in paragraph 3 above, the amounts involved shall be credited to section 9 of the 1961 budget for the Force; 5. Approves the recommendations set forth in paragraphs 67 to 70 of the Secretary-General's report on the United Nations Emergency Force 24 concerning reimbursement of Governments in respect of supplies, material and equipment furnished to their contingents. E. Relations With Certain Countries and Concerning Certain Problems of the Area THE INDUS WATERS SETTLEMENT 214. SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED INDUS WATERS TREATY AND OF THE INDUS BASIN DEVELOPMENT FUND AGREEMENT: Department of State Summary of Announcement Issued by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, February 29, 19601 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development announced on February 29 that the negotiations for the conclusion of a water treaty between India and Pakistan in settlement of the Indus waters question are continuing in Washington under the auspices of the World Bank. It is hoped that final agreement on all the outstanding points to be included in the treaty will be reached within the next 2 months.2 The treaty would be based on a division of the Indus waters on the lines of the proposal made by the Bank to the two Governments in February 1954. Under this proposal the three eastern rivers of the Indus system (Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi) would be for the use of India, and the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) would be for the use of Pakistan. This division of the waters necessitates the construction of works to transfer, from the three western rivers, supplies to meet the irrigation uses in those areas of Pakistan which have hitherto depended on supplies from the three eastern rivers. The effect of this transfer would be to release the whole flow of the three eastern rivers for irrigation development in India, and, as part of the treaty, India 24 U.N. doc. A/4486. Department of State Bulletin, Mar. 21, 1960, pp. 442–443. would agree to contribute toward the costs of these works. The system of works to be constructed would, however, provide further substantial additional irrigation development both in India and Pakistan and, as well as irrigation, would develop important hydroelectric potential in both countries. It would also make an important contribution to soil reclamation and drainage in Pakistan and provide a measure of flood protection in both countries. It is estimated that the total cost of the system of works to achieve these results would be of the order of the equivalent of $1,000 million, partly in foreign exchange and partly in local currencies. The Bank has evolved a plan to finance the required expenditure and has had assurances from certain friendly governments of their readiness to participate in the cost of the plan, over and above the amounts to be contributed by India and Pakistan and by the Bank itself. The implementation of the financial plan and the participation of the governments concerned would, of course, be contingent on the ratification of the water treaty now under negotiation and would be subject to such parliamentary and congressional action as may in each case be necessary. The participation of each of the friendly governments concerned would be as follows: Australia Canada New Zealand United Kingdom United States A. In Foreign Exchange £A 6,964,286 in grants US $177,000,000 in grants, and B. In Local Currency The equivalent of US $235,000,000 The President of the World Bank is prepared to recommend to the Bank's Directors that the Bank should participate with loans to India and Pakistan of the order of $103 million. The Bank's financial plan envisages that all construction contracts. would be open to competitive bidding and that the foreign exchange contributions would be freely usable for purchases anywhere in accordance with procedures similar to those followed by the Bank in its normal operations. The costs of the construction program would be spread over a period of approximately 10 years, and the general supervision of the program would be undertaken by the Bank. 215. THE NEED FOR AUTHORITY TO WAIVE THE PROVISIONS OF CARGO PREFERENCE LEGISLATION TO PERMIT UNITED STATES PARTICIPATION IN THE INDUS BASIN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: Letter From the Under Secretary of State (Dillon) to the President of the American Merchant Marine Institute (Casey), April 11, 1960 3 3 DEAR MR. CASEY: I refer to your letter of April 6 regarding the meeting with representatives of the maritime industry on April 5 at which we discussed the proposed amendment to the Mutual Security Act relating to the Indus Basin project. I found the meeting helpful also and hope that it clarified the subject for you. As I stated at the meeting the Executive Branch has no intention whatsoever of seeking to depart from the established policy set forth in the cargo preference legislation. In seeking an amendment relating to the Indus Basin project we have asked for permissive authority whereunder the President could waive the requirements of the cargo preference legislation with respect to this particular project if he found that the provisions of the cargo preference act could not be fully satisfied without seriously impeding or preventing accomplishment of the Indus Basin project. As we have explained to the Congress and to you and your associates, we do not foresee need to exercise this authority in the near future. If the present programs of assistance under the Mutual Security Act were to continue at approximately present levels over the period of time that will be required to complete the Indus Basin project, we could probably be reasonably confident that no necessity to waive the provisions of the cargo preference legislation would arise. Yet the fact that we anticipate ability to compensate within the regular Mutual Security Program for the required proportion of the tonnage deriving from implementation from the Indus Basin project may tend to obscure the importance which attaches to the requested authority to waive the requirements of the cargo preference legislation with respect to this particular project. As you are aware, the very fabric of the planning for this project rests upon its multilateral character and upon the voluntary agreement, by all of the contributors to the Indus Basin Development Fund, to refrain from applying to their contributions the national preference requirementsof whatever nature-which would normally govern the use of such funds. Were the United States to apply preferential conditions to its contribution, we could not logically oppose the application_of counter-conditions on the contributions of other nations. The welter of conflicting national conditions which might be expected to ensue would complicate the administration of the Indus project to the point where the present proposal would no longer be operable. You will 'Department of State Bulletin, May 9, 1960, pp. 741-742. Text ibid., pp. 742–743. 5 See sec. 204 (e) of the Mutual Security Act of 1960; post, doc. 392. |