Mr. Roosevelt.

Mrs. Kelly.

Mrs. KELLY. No.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Lanham.

Mr. LANHAM. No.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Harrison.

Mr. HARRISON. No.

Mr. CRAWFORD. The vote is 13 to 9.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. The motion is carried.

Mr. Fulton, the next amendment that you had was to cut the figure of $15 million for South America to $10 million.

Mr. SMITH. Does the gentleman want to yield? I have a change on line 5 that I would like to submit at this time.

Mr. FULTON. I will yield.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. All right, Mr. Smith.

SMITH AMENDMENT TO SECTION 301 TO ELIMINATE MILITARY AID TO

JAPAN

Mr. SMITH. I would substitute part of line 5 and part of line 6. I would strike the figure of $1,081 million, and so forth. I would substitute $961,929,493. What that amounts to is the figure, as indicated on our chart, of $119,691,000 for Japan. Here we have another one of those super-secret compositions. The cut amounts to $119,691,000.

Mr. BATTLE. For Japan?

Mr. SMITH. For Japan, that is right. There is in this chart that figure. You will remember General Stewart's testimony to the effect that no program has been set up, no understanding has been reached, and that is merely an effort to meet the day when we might be in a position to do something for Japan militarily. They are confronted in Japan with the fact that there is a constitutional provision which provides that Japan shall not rearm, and that if any information is gotten out to the effect that we are advancing $119,691,000, there might be some trouble internally. I think, in view of the fact that no program has been set up, that if a situation arises and there is a need for money in Japan, and if it is possible to advance some money for Japan, we can do it upon very short notice.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. This is just small arms and that kind of thing?

Mr. SMITH. That is right.

Mr. FULTON. A substitute amendment.

Mr. SMITH. It seems to me we are courting trouble if we approve $119 million for Japan under the present circumstances. I have no objection to doing something for Japan. I think it is absolutely essential that we retain a position in Japan, but I am afraid that that is not the way to do it.

Mr. RICHARDS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SMITH. Yes.

LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY IN SECTION 301 TO PROVIDE MILITARY AID TO

JAPAN

Mr. RICHARDS, I would like to ask if there is authority in this section, if your amendment is adopted, to transfer any money to Japan.

Mr. VORYS. Yes. The area of China covers a multitude of sins. I do not think there is any need for additional legislative authority. The area of China is the definition in title III.

Mr. RICHARDS. You mean they could transfer it?

Mr. SMITH. Yes.

Mr. JUDD. Furthermore, on page 4 of the Ribicoff amendment last. year, money can be used out of that. It is $100 million which the President can do whatever he wants to with, except not more than 20 out of any one country. So there is 20 plus the general area of China that can be used for Japan.

FULTON SUBSTITUTE

AMENDMENT

ΤΟ REDUCE FURTHER THE TOTAL

TITLE III AUTHORIZATION

Mr. FULTON. I move that the figure be cut $80,620,493. That is the same figure that Mr. Smith is referring to. His cut is $119 million. Mine is $80,620,493. The reason for that is when they sent the figures up to us, they sent on May 29, the figure of $1,001 million. Then when the legislation comes up, it is $1,081,620,493. So between the figures they submitted to us on May 29-and here it is right here and the figures in the legislation, there is an $80,620,493 discrepancy. I move that the discrepancy be cut.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Did they ever explain that?

Mr. BULLOCK. When the savings occurred, a letter was sent to the chairman announcing the savings and a breakdown was submitted of how the savings were to be distributed in the program. The chairman got out a press release setting forth all of that. A couple of days later a new draft of the bill came up which the committee had printed and the savings, amounting to the same $354 million, were redistributed. It happened that in that redistribution they put the figure back to $1,081 million as it had been before. There has never been any country breakdown revision since the original $5.8 billion came up. This M-9 has never said whether they intend to revise the amount going to Japan below $119 million as it originally came up. So you do not know what is added up to give you the figure.

Mr. FULTON. But you see, if there is a saving from $1,001 million, you cannot then add a saving on and get $1,081 million because they have gone up $80 million when they should have made a deduction. Mr. JAVITS. Will the gentleman yield?

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Mr. Javits.

Mr. JAVITS. I noticed this and just asked Mr. Bullock about it and he made the same explanation. If you are going to do any cutting, it is a figure which makes a little sense in cutting. I point out that when they sent it up here, they had more on the Near East and they had more on Europe. When the bill came up, they deducted some from Europe, some from the Near East, and added it on to the Far East. What Mr. Fulton is doing now is taking advantage of their cut, but not of the addition.

Mr. FULTON. If there are savings, they must deduct them from Europe and the Near East, and they should have deducted it from the Far East, too.

Mr. JAVITS. I am just explaining the figures.

Mr. JUDD. Mr. Chairman, may I ask for information?
Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Yes.

Mr. JUDD. When they sent up this letter telling about the savings, Mr. Bullock says they gave a breakdown. I did not see that. Was that distributed to the committee?

Mr. BULLOCK. It was not in the letter. We got a breakdown anyway and we got a press release on it.

Mr. JUDD. I would like to see that breakdown. I am curious where they saved their $354 million.

RATIONALE FOR PROVIDING ADDITIONAL MILITARY AID TO FAR EAST COUNTRIES

Mr. VORYS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard against both these notions. The two key countries, power politics-wise, are Germany and Japan. It was the fact that we shipped to them both at once that pulled the forces away from the Russian borders that tended to make them behave. In this bill we have accepted, without a suggestion of an amendment, a program of $295,600,000 additional stockpiling, or German military rearmament, and we have got already in that stockpile a billion dollars. Although there is no agreement yet, we are expecting to move in with lightning speed to rearm Germany. I do not need to say another word about the importance of getting Germany strong again for the security of Europe and that whole front.

Precisely the same situation applies to Japan. We are in the situation as with Germany where we have no authority and Japan has now no authority to accept arms. It is true that under their existing constitution we are building up a substantial police force, a home guard, which can be carried on under their present constitution and which is utterly vital when you consider that on the islands, within something like 3 miles of northern Japan, there are Russian parachute troops.

I have been one that has already joined in voting reductions and voting against preparations for forces that are subject to international agreements. Our arrangement with Japan is not an international one. It is a bilateral one where all we have to do is to make a deal with Japan and we can start to put arms in there to take care of this utterly vital flank of our defenses to the East. The more we pull out of Korea, the more important it is that we have forces in Japan.

One other reason I am against it is that the Far East has been low man on the totem pole as far as preparing for adequate defenses is concerned. In this bill right now there is only $244 million for the Formosan forces, and they have only had in the past $131 million, and they have only got $283 million, as you will see in your brown book. That is a very small amount. I am hoping that with the changes in the Joint Chiefs we will quit kidding ourselves and the public and the Formosans on armament. This eliminates $119 million from that area that, if it were not available for Japan, might be transferred to Formosa. In view of the fact that Japan, Formosa, the Philippines, and Indochina are involved in the military money here, although it is increased over last year, it is still half what we are pouring into Europe in addition to the billions we have already poured. I certainly hope we will not monkey with title III

military money and I hope these amendments or any amendments to them will be soundly defeated.

JAPANESE CONSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS ON REARMAMENTS

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Mrs. Church.

Mrs. CHURCH. Mr. Chairman, may I be heard?

Before I knew that Mr. Smith was going to introduce his amendment, I had worked for fully an hour trying to formulate an amendment which would do what Mr. Smith is trying to do, but which would embody something else. Because of security reasons, I realize perfectly well this amendment cannot be offered. But the amendment I would have liked to offer would have been in consideration of the amount on line 5 and line 6 of page 2, of which $119 million for rearmament of Japan shall not be provided unless and until the people of Japan have made the necessary changes in the Japanese constitution which would be necessary to permit such rearmament.

I am thoroughly in favor of giving proportionate aid to Africa. In fact, I think Asia has been neglected. I agree with Mr. Vorys. I certainly would not like to cut down the lump total. I simply cannot feel that we are doing what is entirely right in going behind the backs of the Japanese people by officially recommending in the budget of this committee that we arm the Japanese people through making deals with their leadership. It would seem to me that there is enough money in the overall amount left at the discretion of the President to permit him to do this as a strategic measure. This might be begging the issue, but to my mind it would be very much better than putting ourselves on record as the Foreign Affairs Committee of a very great, democratic, and representative body in favor of going around the constitution which we forced on the people of Japan. I would support the Smith amendment.

Mr. LANHAM. Would the lady yield there? Do you not think we had something to do with their adopting that provision in their constitution? Did we not go behind their backs to get that done? I am sure we did.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Mr. Lanham, I thought so, too, and I asked the then Secretary of State George C. Marshall, "Didn't you have something to do with that," and he said that was before his time.

Mr. JUDD. General MacArthur did that.

Mrs. CHURCH. I think the fact that we did the wrong thing does not make a second wrong proper.

Mr. VORYS. As you will see in our tables here, this is programed for the national safety forces which Japan cannot have under its present constitution.

Mrs. CHURCH. Is that not calling a rose by any other name? Maybe that would convince the floor, but it would not convince me that the purpose is any different.

Mr. VORYS. If the city of Chicago, without having any Army or Navy or Air Force, had 3 miles away from them out in Lake Michigan a bunch of paratroopers that were intent on coming in and

Gen. Douglas MacArthur, U.S. Army, was U.S. Military Governor of Japan at the time being discussed here.

taking over the government of the city of Chicago, would you call the augmenting of your police forces for your own immediate protection something that we must not do? Would you say, "We must let them come because we don't have an Army, Navy, or Air Force?" These are the facts of life that we face.

Mrs. CHURCH. Then why do we not go to the people of Japan and explain their need and have them change their constitution.

Mr. VORYS. We are talking about a sovereign nation.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Vorys does not say that. He is dodging the issue. There is no plan for $119 million. They came here and said so. That is the testimony and that is the record. In other words, we are going along writing a blank check here for $119 million.

Mr. PROUTY. I think I can assure you that no one in Japan thinks of this so-called police force just as a police force. Those men are being trained in tanks, and I believe they have paratroopers and everything else. The Japanese people, the officials, and the American Army personnel think of it as an army, not as a police force.

COMPARISON OF PROPOSED REDUCTIONS IN AID TO FAR EASTERN NATIONS

Mr. FULTON. May I have a question, please?

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. I think the parliamentary situation is that the substitute comes first.

Mr. FULTON. May I have a question, John?
Chairman CнIPERFIELD. Yes.

Mr. FULTON. You have not directed your remarks to the fact that on May 29 for this area there was only requested $1,001 million. You may be against Mr. Smith's amendment on policy, but unless you can justify the fact that the statement of $1,001 million on May 29 is wrong, then my amendment should take effect.

Likewise, Mrs. Church and Mr. Prouty should remember that there are $100 million of undesignated funds, of which $20 million can be given to a country under section 13(b). You have got to reserve money for these things in case things come up. I want it, but I would like to ask John a question.

John, what has changed your mind this year? You were for a bigger cut in the Far East aid last year, and this year you are for

none.

Mr. VORYS. No; I was not. I opposed the cut in committee, and I opposed it successfully on the floor.

Mr. FULTON. What did you cut there?

Mr. VORYS. We cut economic aid under the guise of point 4 $111 million. Not a dime of it involved military aid for the Far East. We did it in this committee and on the floor, and I opposed any motion to the amendments to cut the amount, and I feel that way right now.

Chairman CHIPERFIELD. Mr. Fulton, Roy tells me that there was an

error.

Mr. BULLOCK. No; they sent up a draft bill which we had printed on the 29th of May that contained the first revision after the savings were announced. Then they came up on the 4th of June with another draft bill and asked the committee to have that printed, and it had the revised figures which are before you now.