28

I do not believe in myself." And at that moment he saw the girl and—Lo!—the glass beads on her breast were suddenly transformed into pearls. He saw that one was a beautiful blue pearl and he said: "Little girl, give me that pearl. Give it to me so that I can smile again." And the girl took off the pearl and gave it to him, and the man smiled and once more had faith in men.

They continued their climb and soon met an even older man who moaned and cried because he had lost hope. He had believed in his children and had great hopes for them; he had lost his fortune—everything. And when he saw the green pearl gleaming on the girl's breast he asked her for it. She gave it to him, and he smiled again, and there was hope in his heart.

And finally, at the top of the mountain, they came upon an ancient man whom the world had forgotten, and when he saw the little girl he asked for the last pearl that was left—a red pearl, red for love. The little girl gave it to him but at that moment, weakened by his struggles, he died. And the legend says that in spite of the winter cold and the snow, fountains gushed forth and flowers covered his grave.

Ladies and gentlemen: this children's tale tells us that there are three things that move mankind, whether we choose to admit it or not: Faith in men, hope for a better world and human solidarity. For this reason we, the Foreign Ministers of this hemisphere, must proclaim this spirit of Tlatelolco which, like the blue, green and red pearls stands for faith, hope and human solidarity.

I thank you.

## 8. SPEECH MADE BY THE SECRETARY OF FOREIGN RELATIONS, EMILIO O. RABASA, AT THE CONFERENCE OF TLATELOLCO

Foreign Ministers, Ambassadors, Ladies and Gentlemen: We have reached the end of a journey. We are starting another. It would not be fitting to consider this Tlatelolco Conference as an event that has solved all our concerns and problems. I feel that it is more realistic to consider it as a starting point. The great tasks—the effective implementation of the points of agreement—are yet to be carried out. We must start to do so from today.

When we affirm the above, we do not mean that our efforts of these days have been in vain. In my opinion, if one may speak of the spirit of Tlatelolco it is in the sense that here, for the first time in many years we meet on a level of absolute equality, of mutual respect and of friendly frankness to examine, in a critical manner, what it is that has separated us and what may now bring us together.

This Conference has used—and perhaps used too much—the word dialogue. But it is a true fact that, as has been said, we have progressed from political speeches to political dialogue. And what is more, I would like to add that we now engage in political consultation. The United States of America has pledged its word on it. It must be done in advance and for all areas. As a matter of course, and this should be clearly understood, when dealing with the large interests that affect Latin-America.

Our relationship with the United States of America has fluctuated hopelessly between subordination and confrontation. At Tlatelolco we have solved the dilemma and replaced it with a concept of solidary cooperation based on the following premises: that the country that lies North of the Rio Grande will not attempt to impose its political preferences; that it will not intervene in the internal matters of others; that it will try to find formulas of accommodation precisely at the point where our interests may be divergent and that, through consultation, it will coordinate efforts for our mutual benefit.

Throughout our deliberations, we have confirmed the existence of a new approach of the United States of America toward the Hemisphere and we are certain that bases have been laid for what must be—if to the sincerity of purpose we add the will to take action—a mutually respectful, working and effective cooperation.

Even while we recognize the need for, and the benefits of such cooperation, we maintain that it is the responsibility of Latin America and of each and every one of our countries to safeguard our rights to defend our interests in any forum we choose.

It has been said of Latin-America that we do not march in step with history. The eight Bogota points that at last united us in the same common cause, and the Tlatelolco Conference prove precisely the opposite. We did not come here to

29

review past grievances nor did we wish to bury past history, since history must remain a constant lesson for the future.

We are not lowering our flag, and we still believe that the legal equality of the States, the economic equality that we are now seeking, and the self-determination of the peoples, constitute the base for peace, freedom and human dignity.

We are well aware that two hundred and eighty million human beings have not only the right, but demand to know the truth. Weary as they are of hearing unkept promises, they impatiently demand food, housing, health, education and other age-old requirements that we must satisfy now.

We are all equal. However, in a well ordered society, the weak must be protected by law lest they be oppressed by the strong. This is one of the intentions of the Letter on the Economic Rights and Duties of the States, a document that not only Mexico but many nations are anxious to put into effect as soon as possible.

We must be fully conscious of the fact that a certain era is over and another begins. International order, as established at the end of the second World War, has become disrupted and must accept a new regulation of international relations. We demand—in all justice—to participate in the drawing up of the new norms. We must take part in the decisions that are to be made on the monetary system, international trade, the energy crisis, the population explosion and other grave matters that affect the daily lives of hundreds of million of human beings. And we cannot agree the road to progress can be allowed to bypass the sovereignty of each State.

Internal Democracy and external peace are indispensable bases for man's happiness. Democracy is not merely a system that puts into operation the formal mechanisms that permit the acts of the government to be controlled by the people. Democracy is social justice. Democracy is economic equality and equal opportunity. Democracy is peace, not only as an absence of armed conflict but as international harmony and cooperation to achieve a more just distribution of wealth among the peoples.

Alfonso Reyes, an illustrious Mexican writer, said "The destiny of America lies in continuing to afford protection to all attempts to improve mankind and also in serving as a setting for the grand adventure of good."

This, and this alone, is the intent of the Tlatelolco Conference.

## 9. DECLARATION OF TLATELOLCO

### I

At the request of President Nixon, Secretary of State Kissinger, invited the Foreign Ministers and other representatives of Latin America and the Caribbean attending the Twenty-Eighth Session of the United Nations General Assembly to meet with him on October 5, 1973. At that time the Secretary of State suggested the initiation of a new dialogue to deal with matters of concern to the Americas.

Mindful of this important initiative, the Government of Colombia extended an invitation to Dr. Kissinger to participate actively and personally in such a dialogue at an opportune time. Dr. Kissinger immediately accepted this invitation. Thereafter, the Government of Colombia convoked the "Conference of Foreign Ministers of Latin America for Continental Cooperation", held in Bogota from November 14-16, 1973. On that occasion the Foreign Ministers of Latin America and the Caribbean agreed it would be advantageous to initiate a dialogue on the following topics:

* Cooperation for Development;

* Coercive measures of an Economic Nature;

* Restructuring of the Inter-American System;

* Solution of the Panama Canal Question;

* Structure of International Trade and the Monetary System;

* Transnational Enterprises;

* Transfer of Technology; and

* General Panorama of the Relations between Latin America and the United States of America.

In accordance with the agreement reached at the "Conference of Foreign Ministers of Latin American for Continental Cooperation", and with the concurrence of the Government of the United States of America, the Government of the

30

LC

United Mexican States convoked the Conference of Tlatelolco. This Conference took place in Mexico City from February 18-23, 1974.

The Agenda of the Conference of Tlatelolco comprised the eight items listed above, with the addition of two others suggested by the Secretary of State in accordance with the agreement reached in Bogota regarding "the willingness of the participating countries to discuss any other matters the United States of America wishes to propose". The topics suggested by the Government of the United States were "Review of the International Situation" and "the Energy Crisis".

Attending the Conference of Tlatelolco were the Foreign Ministers of Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, the United States of America, Uruguay and Venezuela.

The Conference was held in two parts, one with exclusively Latin American participation, from February 18-20, and the other from February 21-23, with the participation of Secretary of State Kissinger. In the first phase of the Conference of Tlatelolco, the Latin American and Caribbean Foreign Ministers agreed on procedures for the initiation of the new dialogue, which Secretary Kissinger had proposed be founded on "friendship based on equality and respect for the dignity of all", and upon methods for delineating the "Bases for a New Dialogue between Latin America and the United States". The Secretary of State agreed to these procedures.

## II

The Conference took place in an atmosphere of cordiality, free from the old rigidities which have so often obstructed our dialogues in more traditional forums. The participants met as equals, conscious that the policy initiated here may be of deep historical significance. But for it to be so we must recognize that we are at a turning point, and be prepared to dedicate ourselves to new horizons of understanding and cooperation.

The Foreign Ministers agreed that the Americas have arrived at an historic moment—a time of unprecedented opportunity for achieving the goals of justice, peace and human dignity which have for so long been the essential promise of the New World.

They recognized that in the modern age the demands of technology and the drive of human aspirations make impossible the narrow pursuit of purely national interests.

They agreed, as well, that interdependence has become a physical and moral imperative, and that a new, vigorous spirit of Inter-American solidarity is therefore essential.

Relations between the countries of the Americas must be placed in the context of today's world; a world characterized by interdependence, the emergence onto the world stage of the developing countries, and the need to overcome inequalities. The existence of a modern inter-American System; the affirmation of the reality of Latin American unity; and the similarity of the problems of Latin America and those of other developing countries are the foundation for a dialogue and a frank and realistic relationship with the United States.

Inter-American relations should be based on an effective equality between States; on non-intervention; on the renunciation of the use of force and coercion and on the respect for the right of countries to choose their own political, economic and social systems. Inter-American relationships, thus redefined by an authentic political will, would create the necessary conditions for living together in harmony and working cooperatively for expanded and self-sustaining economic development.

The Foreign Ministers reaffirmed the principle that every State has the right to choose its own political, economic and social system without foreign interference and that it is the duty of every State to refrain from intervening in the affairs of another.

The new opportunities for cooperative development call for a revision of the concept of regional security, which cannot, and should not, be based solely on political-military criteria, but must also encompass a practical commitment to peaceful relations, cooperation and solidarity among States.

To this end, inter-American cooperation should be supplemented by the establishment of a system of collective economic security that protects the essential

31

requirements of integral development: that is to say parallel progress in the social, economic and cultural fields.

By mandate of the United Nations General Assembly, a group of countries representing diverse economic systems is engaged in examining the possibilities of restructuring international economic relations, through the preparation of a Draft Charter on the Economic Rights and Duties of States. This Charter can create the general framework for facing specific problems through practical and fair regulations and mechanisms.

The Conference of Tlatelolco agreed that a just application of the principles of the Charter can foster the internal and external conditions necessary for the American nations to satisfy their own needs and ensure their full development on an equitable basis. The Conference also recognized that peace and progress, in order to be solid and enduring, must always be based on respect for the rights of others, and the recognition of reciprocal responsibilities and obligations among developed and developing countries.

### III

In the course of permanent dialogue that has been successfully initiated at the Conference of Tlatelolco, a continuing effort should be made to reach, as soon as possible, joint solutions to the pending questions included in the Bogota Document, which served as the basis for this Conference.

### IV

The Conference goes on record as follows:

(1) The Foreign Ministers recognized that the success of the Conference of Tlatelolco emphasizes the value of the new dialogue of the Americas. Mindful of the growing interaction between themselves and the rest of the world and that their countries have different needs and different approaches on foreign policy, the Foreign Ministers were nevertheless agreed that the relations between their countries, which history, geography and sentiment have produced and continued to sustain, call for an expansion of the processes of consultation between their Governments.

As an initial step in this continuing process of consultation they agreed to continue on April 17, 1974 at Atlanta, Georgia, in the United States of America, the dialogue initiated in Mexico. In the same spirit they agreed to consult with the view to seeking, as far as possible, common positions in appropriate international consultations, including multilateral trade negotiations.

(2) The Conference welcomes the agreement reached in Panama City on February 7, 1974 by the Governments of Panama and the United States of America, by which they established the guiding principles for their current negotiations leading to a new Canal treaty. The Conference holds that this agreement is a significant step forward on the road to a definitive solution of that question.

(3) The Foreign Ministers agreed that, if progress toward a new Inter-American solidarity is to be made, solutions must be found not only to existing differences, but means must also be provided for the solution of problems that may arise.

(4) In this spirit, the Foreign Ministers of Latin America have taken due note and will continue to examine the suggestion advanced by the Secretary of State of the United States of America with respect to the controversies that may arise from matters involving private foreign investment.

The Secretary of State of the United States proposed the establishment of a fact-finding or conciliation procedure that would limit the scope of such controversies by separating the issues of fact from those of law. This could provide an objective basis for the solution of disputes without detriment to sovereignty.

He further proposed the creation of an inter-American working group to study the appropriate procedures that might be adopted.

(5) With regard to the problems of transnational corporations, the Foreign Ministers discussed the different aspects of their operation in Latin America and have agreed to continue the examination of the matter at a later meeting.

(6) The Foreign Ministers agreed on the need for intensifying work on the restructuring of the Inter-American system.

32

(7) The Foreign Ministers agreed that one of the principal objectives is the accelerated development of the countries of the Americas and the promotion of the welfare of all their peoples. In this regard, the United States accepts a special responsibility; and the more developed countries of the Americas recognize that special attention should be paid to the needs of the lesser developed.

They further agreed that development should be integral, covering the economic, social and cultural life of their nations.

(8) The United States offered to promote the integral development of the region in the following fields:

*Trade*

(a) Make maximum efforts to secure passage of the legislation on the System of Generalized Preferences during the present session of Congress, and then work with the other countries of the hemisphere to apply these preferences in the most beneficial manner.

(b) Avoid, as far as possible, the implementation of any new measures that would restrict access to the United States market.

*Loans for development*

(a) Maintain, as a minimum, present aid levels despite growing costs.

(b) Cooperate throughout the region and in international institutions to facilitate the flow of new concessional and conventional resources toward those countries most affected by growing energy costs.

(c) Examine with others in the Committee of Twenty and the IADB all restrictions on the entry of hemispheric countries to capital markets in the United States and other industrialized countries.

(9) The Foreign Ministers further declare:

(a) They reaffirm the need of Latin American and Caribbean countries for an effective participation of their countries in an international monetary reform.

It was acknowledged that the net transfer of real resources is basic, and that ways to institutionalize transfers through adequate mechanisms should be considered.

It was reaffirmed that external financial cooperation should preferably be channeled through multilateral agencies and respect the priorities established for each country, without political ties or conditions.

(b) With respect to "Transfers of Technology", the Foreign Ministers agreed to promote policies facilitating transfer of both patented and unpatented technical knowledge among the respective countries in the fields of industry as well as education, housing and agriculture, taking into account conditions prevailing in each country and in particular the needs of the Latin American and Caribbean countries for introduction of new manufactures, for greater utilization of the human and material resources available in each country, for increased local technical development and for creation of products for export. It was further agreed that transfers of technology should be on fair and equitable terms without restraint upon the recipient country. Particular emphasis is to be placed upon sharing knowledge and technology for development of new sources of energy and possible alternatives.

(10) The Foreign Ministers agreed that it would be desirable to establish an Inter-American Commission of Science and Technology. They left over for later decision whether this commission should be adapted from existing institutions or whether a new body should be formed.

V

In adopting this document, the Foreign Ministers expressed their confidence that the spirit of Tlatelolco will inspire a new creative effort in their relations. They recognized that they are at the beginning of a road that will acquire greater significance through regular meetings and constant attention to the matters under study.

The Conference expresses its satisfaction over the fact that the mutual understanding which has prevailed throughout encourages the hope that future conferences of a similar nature, within a permanent framework devoid of all rigid formality, will produce fruitful results for the benefit of the peoples of the Americas.

O

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

May 9, 1975

No. 45

TOAST BY
THE HONORABLE HENRY A. KISSINGER
SECRETARY OF STATE
AT HIS LUNCHEON FOR THE
LATIN AMERICAN FOREIGN MINISTERS

MAY 9, 1975

I am pleased to be able to welcome you here personally. As friends and neighbors, you are always welcome. But I am especially pleased today, for the 12 months since the OAS General Assembly last met in Atlanta have encompassed enough dramatic world events to upset the best-laid plans — including, regrettably, some in which we were involved together.

This is not the time to go into the details of the issues we are discussing this week. But I want to reaffirm to you now the determination of the US Government to move ahead positively on our hemispheric agenda.

President Ford and I have reviewed US efforts to adapt our traditional friendship to the needs of the times. We agree with you that the historic international principles pioneered in this hemisphere — principles of non-intervention, the sovereign equality of nations, and mutual respect among partners — must not only be reaffirmed, but supplemented by strengthened cooperation for the national development and economic security of our peoples.

In Houston last March I said that the ways in which we of the Americas — North and South — approached these issues would have a profound impact on one of the central dilemmas of our times: the relations between the developing countries and the industrialized nations.

I would like to take a moment now to review with you the impact of recent events on our common search for new progress in the hemisphere and new equilibrium in the world.

We meet at a time of wrenching changes in Southeast Asia and of simmering conflict in the Middle East. Throughout the world, economic difficulties have struck so many countries, and occur against such a generalized backdrop of political uncertainty, that the need for a new set of international economic relationships is ever more apparent.

We would be shortsighted to let the inevitable growing pains and adjustments distract us from the immense potential of this historic period — and from the opportunities we have to realize that potential.

It has been clear for some time that the international system had entered (ried of redefinition and that significant adjustments would be required of all countries, large and small.

-2-

The problems of improving political participation, and eliminating poverty are critical to the quality of life on earth. We must give them growing priority. But we must simultaneously seek to assure life by avoiding nuclear catastrophe.

To meet this double challenge of development and security, the United States has developed a foreign policy designed to meet the requirements of the future by building on the gains of the past.

This approach requires broadened cooperation with our traditional friends — in this hemisphere and elsewhere. And, despite ideological antagonisms with our adversaries, it also requires the practical cooperation in certain limited spheres that has come to be known as detente.

The past year has shown that progress toward a new structure of international relations which promotes cooperation rather than force can be very uneven.

But it has not affected the soundness of the objective nor altered its essential framework.

Since we last met as a group, we in the United States have reaffirmed our domestic democracy and the vitality of our institutions. This should not surprise you. You know us well, and you know from your own experience that what may seem turmoil to outsiders frequently conceals inner strength.

It is also true, of course, that the past month has brought a serious reversal for the United States in Southeast Asia. The tragic collapse of the Government of South Viet-Nam has moved us deeply. But it must be understood clearly that the end of the war in Viet-Nam will not mean a withdrawal by the American people from international commitment. We remain committed to strengthening a peaceful world community based on self-determination and fulfillment of all peoples. We will stand by our friends and our commitments. Indeed, with the end of the war in Viet-Nam, we will be redoubling our attention to the great tasks of constructing a new international system.

In this effort, all of us are venturing onto new ground, where there has been little opportunity for ideas to mature or consensus to emerge. The great issues of global cooperation in agriculture, food, energy, and commodities have only begun to be defined. Yet the global agenda of interdependence gives us an opportunity to transcend traditional patterns of thought and action. The United States remains determined to continue to make a major contribution to this agenda.

To achieve our aspirations, the imperative for us all is one of restraint and cooperation. Our priorities and yours coincide in many ways. Our effort to contain the East-West struggle is a strategic imperative. At the same time, the dampening of the Cold War has provided a better opportunity for the expression of your political and economic concerns. Strategic security enables change in the less developed countries to be separated from the East-West struggle.

In the months ahead, the United States will continue to strive for a stable structure of world peace. We will enter a new phase of SALT

-3-

negotiations with the Soviet Union. We will strengthen our alliances in Europe. And we will work with the nations of the Middle East to find a solution that will prevent the current stalemate from getting into war.

This background of global security will enable the dialogue between industrial countries and the less developed to move increasingly to the center stage. Like detente, it is too important to be overshadowed by temporary setbacks. The recent Paris conference between energy producers and consumers did not reach agreement — but it began an essential process of consultation.

US initiatives to enhance world food production, and our continuing research for an equitable and viable energy relationship mark the path we have decided to take. Our approach will be to seek functional producer-consumer action on concrete issues in support of mutually defensible goals. We will work hard to achieve a new International Coffee Agreement. We are giving careful study to the problem of raw materials.

In a general sense, the past year has demonstrated that the international structure we seek requires broad political participation, both domestically and internationally. It has shown that economic growth cannot be taken for granted, that productivity, whether of raw materials or of manufactures, requires a fair return, and that development is indivisible, requiring common effort on many fronts.

The general lessons apply directly to this hemisphere.

Trade, commodities, multinational corporations, technology are intrinsically global problems. They cannot be dealt with as if we were isolated from the global arena.

But these problems acquire a special dimension in this hemisphere. The relations among our countries are intense and deeply rooted in our particular cultures and national histories. As in the past, our cooperation can make important contributions to improving the equilibrium between industrial and developing countries. And, as in the past, our cooperation can be a symbol of a larger world relationship. The United States will make a major effort to give new vitality to its Western Hemisphere relationships but this can succeed only as a cooperative enterprise.

As we now move ahead on vital issues of trade and development, the lessons of the past year are important.

We have understood that we must move forward on a broad front which includes the settlement of outstanding political issues such as the Panama Canal, as well as economic progress.

We have learned that progress requires the serenity to overcome inter-ary conflicts and misunderstandings.

The constructive atmosphere of this Assembly clearly demonstrates that we have learned to confront our problems with more perseverance than rhetoric, more humility than anger.

-4-

For we have learned that dialogue in itself does not bring instant
change. Interdependence affects the entire fabric of our societies:
its complexity will require special efforts from us all.

We must now broaden these efforts and support them with institutional
structures that will enable us to translate our growing understanding
into action.

I am confident that we will do so together:

- We have almost completed the modernization of the Rio
Treaty, thereby strengthening our collective security.

- This General Assembly already reflects the new flexibi-
lity required to deal effectively with the challenges
of development; we must now proceed to make the equally
necessary changes in OAS structure and operations.

As I suggested in my Houston address, we can use our strengthened
regional institutions to search for answers in this Hemisphere to the
challenges posed by development and interdependence.

I am convinced, for example, that the Western Hemisphere can show the
way to the rest of the world in meeting the critical need for increased
food production. The Inter-American Development Bank has already begun
work to establish the Hemisphere Agriculture Consultative Group I
suggested at Houston.

The Inter-American Development Bank is our most important regional
development institution. The Administration will seek a substantial
US contribution to the capital replenishment to be considered soon.

All of us must examine how we can improve access of the poorer countries
of the region to the Bank's concessional funds, while simultaneously
broadening alternative sources of capital, management, and technology
for all countries.

Above all, we must foster the humane vision of the future that has
always marked the Americas. If we can fuse the insights of our
artists and poets with the productive skills of our professionals
and technicians, we will once again transform the American continent
into a vast crucible of ideas and progress worthy of our new attitudes
and our special place in the world.

Friends, I invite you to join me in a toast to the health of our
presidents, to the self-reliance of our peoples, and to the success
of our mutual efforts to bring them together.

* * * * *

PR #108

-2-

"... to open new paths never trod, never known . . . to push on
despite obstacles through every zone. . . "

With the shield of one ocean at our backs and the dream of another one
before us, hope was always just a little farther along the river, over
the mountains, across the plains and jungles. In the old world a frontier
was a limit; in the New World it was an opportunity.

Today's frontiers are not geographical, but frontiers of human need and
creativity. To conquer them is even more important than the adventures
that shaped our past.

At the heart of our contemporary challenge is a new interdependence, both
hemispheric and global. Until recently, Western Hemisphere economic
relationships were largely based on the exchange of raw materials from
Latin America for finished goods from the United States. Today's inter-
dependence reflects a different balance. The internationalization of
production combines technology, labor and capital across national boundaries.

As a result, the Latin American countries now need access to the US
market to sell their manufactured goods as well as their traditional
exports. And Latin America's markets are becoming as important to our
own continued growth as its raw materials -- as indicated by our trade
surplus last year of $1.2 billion.

As interdependence has grown within the Hemisphere, so have the Hemi-
sphere's links to other parts of the world. Latin America has developed
important trading relationships with other industrial nations and has
come to share certain political perspectives with the Third World.
The United States prizes its traditional alliances with the industrialized
democracies, and maintains important political and economic relation-
ships with many less developed nations around the world. Our generation
has had to learn that peace is indivisible; that our national well-being
is intimately tied to the well-being of the rest of the globe.

The awareness of past achievement and faith in common purposes led the
United States in 1973 to begin a new dialogue with Latin America. We
had three objectives:

-- To promote with our friends a new spirit of communication tempered by realism, elevated by hope and free of distrust, despair or resentment.

-- To find new ways to combine our efforts in the political,
economic and social development of the Hemisphere.

-- And to recognize that the global dialogue between the developed and less developed nations requires answers that will be difficult to find anywhere if we do not find them in the Western Hemisphere.

For this hemisphere to which men fled to escape from injustice has a
special obligation to demonstrate that progress can go hand in hand with

PR #108

respect for human dignity, that cooperation among nations is consistent
with respect for national sovereignty, that the most powerful political
force on earth is the voluntary collaboration of free peoples.

Any relationship as long and complex as ours inevitably is haunted by
the bitterness and suspicions of old disputes. We must put these
legacies of our past behind us, for a dialogue dominated by the endless
refrain of old grievances cannot prosper.

Despite temporary interruptions, the United States is prepared to continue the dialogue in a spirit of friendship and conciliation. Next month I will make my first visit to South America as Secretary of State. Next week Assistant Secretary Rogers will visit six countries in the region for preliminary talks.

Let me now outline some of the issues that will face us in these discussions. They include, first, what the United States is prepared to contribute to Western Hemisphere cooperation; second, what we ask of Latin America; and finally what we can do together.

## What We Must Ask of Ourselves

President Ford has asked me to reaffirm our commitment to a new relationship between the United States and Latin America based on the principles of non-intervention, the sovereign equality of nations and mutual respect for the part of the other countries of the Hemisphere.

These principles will guide the United States' approach to major issues that have risen between us -- the status of the Panama Canal; the place of Cuba in the Hemisphere; and the various strands of our economic relations.

PR #108

-4-

The Panama Canal -- Since its opening, the peoples of the world have looked on the Panama Canal as an important lifeline of commerce and international security. It is essential that the Canal remain open to the ships of all nations on fair terms.

In acquiring the rights to build the Canal, the United States was granted exclusive control -- the rights which it would possess and exercise "if it were sovereign" -- over a ten-mile wide strip of Panamanian territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific. In the Canal Zone, we enforce U.S. laws, operate commercial enterprises and control most of the deepwater port facilities that serve Panama.

Over time the nature of the U.S. presence has come to be viewed by the people of Panama -- and indeed by most of the rest of the Hemisphere -- as an infringement upon their national sovereignty and their principal resource -- their country's strategic location.

Clearly both Panama and the United States have vital interests in the Canal. The challenge is to reconcile the security needs of the United States with Panama's national honor and sovereignty. Negotiations on this problem have gone on intermittently for eleven years; in the last year and a half they have moved forward rapidly. We now believe that an agreement on terms fair to all is possible.

We have made progress because each side has recognized the essential needs and constraints of the other. The United States understands that a treaty negotiated in 1903 does not meet the requirements of 1975. We are ready to acknowledge that it is reasonable for Panama to exercise jurisdiction over its territory and to participate in the operation and defense of the Canal. We are prepared to modify arrangements which conflict with Panamanian dignity and self-respect.

In turn we will expect Panama to understand our perspective -- that the efficient, fair and secure operation of the Canal is a vital economic and security interest of the United States; that a new treaty must provide for the operation and defense of the Canal by the United States for an extended period of time; and that a new treaty must protect the legitimate interests of our citizens and property in Panama.

A new treaty based on these principles will make the United States and Panama partners in the operation of the Canal, protect the essential national interests of both, and provide a secure arrangement for the long term.

Serious problems remain to be resolved in the negotiation. But we are confident that they will be overcome if both parties continue

- 5 -

PR #108

to display the seriousness and mutual understanding they have shown so far.

The Administration has been consulting with the Congress as our negotiations have proceeded. We will intensify these consultations and discuss in detail the arrangements which we envisage. A new treaty which reflects the advice and consent of the Senate and the full support of the American people will be a concrete and significant demonstration that with good will on both sides cooperative solutions to the problems of the Western Hemisphere are possible.

**Cuba** -- In January 1962 the Organization of American States determined that Cuba had excluded itself from participation in the inter-American community by its military ties to the Soviet Union and its export of revolution in the Hemisphere. A year later the United States imposed its own sanctions. In 1964 the member nations of the OAS agreed collectively under the Rio Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance to sever diplomatic and trade relations with Cuba.

More than a decade has passed. The countries of Latin America have successfully resisted pressure and subversion; nations that in the early Sixties felt most threatened by Cuban revolutionary violence no longer feel the menace so acutely. This situation has generated a reconsideration of the OAS sanctions and raised questions about the future of our own bilateral relations with Cuba.

Last September several Latin American countries proposed a meeting to consider lifting the collective sanctions. We agreed that a consideration of the Cuban issue at a meeting in Quito of the Foreign Ministers of the Americas was appropriate. We determined to remain completely neutral in the debate and abstained in the vote. Our guiding principle then, as now, was to prevent the Cuba issue from dividing us from our Hemispheric neighbors.

A majority voted to lift the collective sanctions. But the Rio Treaty requires a two-thirds vote and the sanctions thus remain formally in force. The United States considers itself bound by the collective will as a matter of international law, and so there can be no change in our bilateral relations with Cuba as long as the OAS mandate remains in force.

Since the Quito meeting, however, several Latin American countries have announced that they are prepared to resume trade with Cuba. Also since the meeting at Quito, all the OAS nations have tentatively agreed that the Rio Treaty should be amended to permit the lifting of sanctions by a majority vote. Several of my Latin American colleagues have suggested that this agreement in principle might be applied to the existing Cuban sanctions. I will be consulting with them with respect to this initiative during my trip to South America with the attitude of finding a generally acceptable solution.

PR #108

- 6 -

If the OAS sanctions are eventually repealed, the United States will consider changes in its bilateral relations with Cuba and in its regulations. Our decision will be based on what we consider to be in our own best interests, and will be heavily influenced by the external policies of the Cuban government.

We see no virtue in perpetual antagonism between the United States and Cuba. Our concerns relate above all to Cuba's external policies and military relationships with countries outside the Hemisphere. We have taken some symbolic steps to indicate that we are prepared to move in a new direction if Cuba will. Fundamental change cannot come, however, unless Cuba demonstrates a readiness to assume the mutuality of obligation and regard upon which a new relationship must be founded.

**Economic Relations** -- Old political disputes must not distract us from the long-term challenge of the Hemisphere -- the common effort to improve the lives of our peoples.

The expansion of trade, and the establishment of a new trading equilibrium are vital to economic progress and development in the Hemisphere. As Latin American economies grow, so will opportunities for mutual trade. As our own economy grows, we will be able to buy more semi-processed and manufactured goods from Latin America.

In the next few days the President will take the first step to implement the preference system established by the 1974 Trade Act. We will announce the list of products on which the Administration proposes to eliminate all import tariffs for developing countries for ten years. Latin America, as the most advanced developing region and the one nearest the U.S. market, will be in the best position to take advantage of these preferences. The list will benefit nearly $1 billion worth of Latin American exports.

Among the economic issues affecting Western Hemisphere relations none looms larger than the transnational corporation. The transnational corporation has a demonstrated record of achievement as an efficient -- and indeed indispensable -- source of technology, management skill, and capital for development. At the same time, the transnational character of these corporations raises complex problems of governmental regulation, and has aroused concern in Latin America over the relation of their activities to domestic political and economic priorities.

Most Latin American nations take the position that the laws of the host country are conclusive, and that a foreign investor cannot appeal to his own government for protection. The United States, on the other hand, has insisted on espousing the cause of U.S. investors when they are treated in a way which violates international legal standards. And the Congress has reflected this view in such acts as the Hickenlooper and

PR #108

- 7 -

Gonzalez Amendments which cut off aid in the event of nationalization without adequate and timely compensation.

The two legal positions are not easily reconciled. But the United
States is prepared to make a serious effort to find a mutually
acceptable solution which does not prejudice the principles of either
side. A year ago, in Mexico City, at our initiative an inter-
American working group was set up to examine the problem.

The United States is prepared in the context of this endeavor:

-- to work out a new declaration of principles to govern
the treatment of transnational enterprises and for the
transfer of technology;

-- to develop intergovernmental mechanisms to prevent and
resolve investment disputes and the problems between
governments that arise from them;

-- to fashion new modes of cooperation to deal with conflicts
of laws and jurisdiction relating to transnational cor-
porations; and

-- to encourage private enterprise to make its vital
contributions to Latin America in forms congenial to
the economic and political needs of the host countries.

We have, in the past, made significant progress in these areas on a
pragmatic, case-by-case basis. We should now seek more general
agreement as part of the New Dialogue. The transnational Working Group
which was interrupted by the postponement of the Buenos Aires meeting
should resume its important work. A mutually acceptable solution would
go a long way toward removing trade and investment conflicts from U.S.
decisions respecting aid relationships with the host countries.

This is important because Latin American sensitivity to the exercise
of economic leverage has been finely honed by history. Experience
has also demonstrated that automatic sanctions -- including the
1974 Trade Act's denial of preferences to such OPEC countries as Ecuador
and Venezuela, which did not join the oil embargo -- are almost always
harmful. Automatic sanctions allow no tactical flexibility. They
present other governments with a public ultimatum; by seeming to
challenge the recipient's sovereignty, they harden positions, encumber
diplomacy and poison the entire relationship.

PR #108

-8-

The Administration supports the purpose of the various bills which have been introduced into the Congress -- including one by your own Senator Bentsen -- to modify the provisions of the Trade Act which involve Venezuela and Ecuador. And it is prepared to seek the modification of legislation requiring the automatic cut off of aid. But as a matter of political reality a great deal will depend on our ability to work with the nations of Latin America on new approaches which give practical assurance of fair treatment. They must recognize that Congressional sanctions stem from perceived injuries to legitimate interests.

As part of the New Dialogue, the Administration is prepared to develop new principles and practices which may commend themselves to Congress as a better remedy than automatic sanctions.

## What Latin America Can Do

What do we have a right to expect from Latin America?

In the past decade, progress in science, industry, agriculture, and education have done much to transform the Continent. Economic growth has been steady and sometimes spectacular. Political institutions have adapted to new social conditions and national traditions. A new sense of Latin American unity has promoted an awareness of common problems and opportunities.

We welcome the strength and self-confidence that this evolution implies. We have seen new leadership in Latin America and new Latin American leadership in the international arena. Panamanian and Peruvian soldiers serve with the UN peace-keeping forces in the Middle East. Last December the Andean countries, following a Peruvian initiative, pledged themselves to limit the acquisition of offensive weapons -- an initiative we support and encourage. Venezuela has taken the lead in stimulating regional cooperation by offering oil revenues to the Inter-American Bank and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration. Working with Bolivia, Paraguay, and Uruguay, Argentina and Brazil are pooling their technology and resources to harness the vast potential of the River Plate Basin.

However, with these welcome initiatives have come other less hopeful trends.

The United States is concerned by the growing tendency of some Latin American countries to participate in tactics of confrontation between the developing and developed worlds. We accept non-alignment as a necessary, largely positive force. We believe that the developed nations -- and particularly the United States as the most powerful industrial country -- have a special obligation to be sensitive both to the legacy of history and to the imperatives of change.

It is therefore ironic that some nations seek to exact by confrontation what can only be gained through cooperation, and that countries which once chose non-alignment to protect themselves from blocs are now trying to form a rigid bloc of their own. In doing so they obstruct the

PR #108

-9-

association with the industrialized nations on which their own economic and social progress ultimately depends. Such tactics are particularly inappropriate for the Western Hemisphere where they threaten to repudiate a long tradition of cooperative relations with the United States at the very moment when the United States has dedicated itself to common progress.

As the most developed part of the Third World, Latin American nations will increasingly play roles in both the industrialized and developing sectors of the globe. They have a unique opportunity to foster the mutual accommodation of these groups globally.

> To do so there is no better guidepost than the Declaration signed by all Western Hemisphere nations in Mexico City last year: "... peace and progress, in order to be solid and enduring, must always be based on respect for the rights of others and the recognition of reciprocal responsibilities and obligations among developed and developing countries."

The temptation to blame disappointments on the intrigues and excesses of foreigners is as old as nations themselves. Latin America is perennially tempted to define its independence and unity through opposition to the United States.

The Latin American postponement of the Buenos Aires meeting of Foreign Ministers, ostensibly in reaction to the recent US Trade Act, is a case point. Some Latin American nations chose to read into this legislation a coercive intent which did not exist, and asked for immediate remedies beyond the capacity of our constitutional processes to provide. As a result, the next step in the New Dialogue was delayed just when it was most needed. The nations of America face too many challenges to permit their energies to be expended in such fruitless and artificial confrontations.

We do not expect agreement with all our views, but neither can we accept a new version of paternalism, in which those with obligations have no rights, and those who claim rights accept no obligations. The choice for the United States is not between domination and indifference. The choice for Latin America is not between submission and confrontation.

Instead we should steer between those extremes toward a new equilibrium. After decades of oscillating between moods of euphoria and disillusionment, between charges of hegemony and neglect, it is time for the United States and Latin America to learn to work together, calmly and without confrontation, on the challenges to our common civilization.

The United States does not seek precise reciprocity. We recognize our special obligations as the richest and most powerful nation in the Hemisphere. But experience teaches that international problems cannot be resolved by any one country acting alone -- or by any group of nations acting as an exclusive bloc.

PR #108

-10-

## What We Must Do Together

With a new attitude, the nations of the Western Hemisphere can dedicate themselves to an agenda for the future. In the coming months, the United States will make proposals for such an agenda and present it to its partners in various forums including the meeting of the OAS General Assembly this spring.

Today I shall confine myself to two critical areas: hemispheric development and food.

**Hemispheric Development** -- In the past decade, Latin America's overall growth rate has exceeded the economic targets of the Alliance for Progress. The region has also made greater progress than any other developing area toward economic integration. The Central American Common Market, the Caribbean Common Market, the Andean Pact, and the Latin American Free Trade Association have begun to translate abstract hopes into realities. Nevertheless, Latin America's relative share of global trade has fallen. And economic progress has been unevenly distributed, both within and among countries.

Some Latin American countries have only recently begun the process of development. As with poor countries everywhere, they require large amounts of concessional assistance. The United States will continue to contribute its share.

The Administration will ask Congress to replenish the US contribution to the Inter-American Development Bank, both concessional funds and ordinary capital. Assuming other nations in the Hemisphere are willing to do their share, we will seek a US contribution as large as the last replenishment, or $1.8 billion.

The proposal will be considered by the House of Representatives Sub-committee whose Chairman is the distinguished Henry B. Gonzalez -- from San Antonio. Coupled with the contribution of $755 million from twelve new members -- the European countries, Japan and Israel -- and a $500 million trust fund established by Venezuela, these fresh resources to the IDB will give a major new impetus to Western Hemisphere development.

But because the poorest countries must have first priority, concessional assistance is available only in limited quantities to a new and growing group of Latin American countries that have reached an intermediate stage of development. They have a diversified industrial sector, a significant consumer class, and an increasing capacity to compete in world markets. Their need for foreign exchange is growing.

Therefore, they require greater access to the markets of the developed countries, for exports are the chief source of their external funds. To this end, the Trade Act and the multilateral trade negotiations in Geneva are of great significance. As we have pledged in our New Dialogue, we will, in these negotiations, work in close collaboration with the countries of the Western Hemisphere.

PR #108

-11-

But these countries also need investment capital. Significant amounts of capital continue to flow to the intermediate countries from the United States private sector through investment and from commercial bank lending. But these countries could also benefit substantially from improved access to capital markets.

While the United States long-term bond capital market is the world's largest, few developing countries have been able to borrow successfully in it.

To ease this problem, the United States has taken the initiative for a study by the IMF and World Bank Development Committee, of ways to promote the increased use of capital markets by developing countries. These will be neither aid programs nor recycling devices, but will facilitate independent access to such markets. The United States is prepared to explore ways in which it can be helpful to those Latin American countries with higher levels of income and credit standing to move toward self-reliance.

The countries of Latin America, regardless of their stage of development, are vulnerable to violent swings in the prices of their exports of raw materials. There is no more critical issue of economic relations in the Hemisphere today than commodities policy.

This issue has been extremely divisive in the Hemisphere -- partly because our attitude has been ambiguous. So let there be no doubt about our views any longer. We strongly favor a world trading system which meets the economic needs of both consumers and producers. Universal producer or unilateral consumer actions must not determine the equilibrium. A dialogue between them on commodity issues is therefore essential. A range of rich possibilities exists that can make our new interdependence a vehicle for more rapid and more equitable global development.

The time has come for the countries of the Western Hemisphere to consider together how commodity issues should be resolved. The United States pledges a serious effort to find a constructive solution which does justice to the concerns of all parties.

**Food** -- Let me turn now to a subject which must command our cooperative efforts -- food, man's most basic need.

Latin America matches the United States as a potential food surplus region. Yet over the past 15 years, Latin American agricultural production has barely kept pace with population. In an area rich in productive land, malnutrition is rife. Most Latin American countries are net food importers. We believe that with a concerted new effort, agricultural production can exceed population growth; adequate nutrition for all can be achieved in this century; and Latin America can become a major food exporter.

PR #108

- 12 -

The immediate need is to improve food production. The U.S. proposes the establishment of a Hemisphere Agricultural Consultative Group under the Inter-American Development Bank. Its goal should be to generate annual production increases in the range of 3-1/2 to 4 percent, to be achieved through:

- new investment in regional and national agricultural programs;

- integration of agricultural research efforts throughout the Hemisphere;

- adoption of improved national food and nutrition programs.

The consultative group should also recommend urgent steps to reduce the waste and spoilage now consuming between 20 and 40 percent of total Latin American food output.

Agricultural research is a central element in attaining adequate nutrition for all. But too often research is unrelated to local needs and efforts elsewhere.

To make research more adequately serve local needs, we will assist the international research centers in Mexico, Colombia, and Peru to extend their projects and programs to other countries in the Hemisphere through closer collaboration with national research institutions.

To foster better exchange of agricultural research information, we propose that a new center be established for Latin America, under the auspices of the Hemisphere Consultative Group, and linked to the Agricultural Information Exchange Center of the Smithsonian Institute in the United States.

The United States is prepared to join with other countries and institutions to finance the local extension efforts of the international research centers and the information exchange center.

Finally, we propose that the U.S. and Latin America jointly establish and finance research centers in nutrition and food technology; that a new generation of Latin American agriculturalists be trained through internships and research in these centers as well as in government and private laboratories and institutions in both continents.

## The Human Dimension

Our immediate economic, political, and technological imperatives must not lead us to neglect the human foundations of our common progress, including the free exchange of ideas and the priceless cultural heritage we share.

PR #108

- 13 -

The discovery of America rekindled a belief in mankind's perfectibility. Our struggles for independence were among the first modern assertions of the fundamental rights of man. No part of the globe has shown a greater commitment to democratic principles. The free flow of ideas is one of the most powerful forces for both liberty and progress. Drawing on this resource, can we now fashion a common vision of the future? What will life in the Americas be like in the next century? The scientists, scholars and professionals of our countries should be exchanging ideas on the implications of current trends in such areas as education, health and social change. Our governments should stimulate the OAS to mobilize the best minds and institutions of the Hemisphere in new programs to define our common future.

Last year in Mexico City, I described our objectives in this Hemisphere as follows:

* "Our common impulse ... is to fulfill the promise of America as a continent which beckoned men to fulfill what was best in them.

* "Our common reality is the recognition of our diversity.

* "Our common task is to forge our historical and geographical links into shared purpose and endeavor."

The United States continues to seek a genuine dialogue with its neighbors on all levels: multilaterally and bilaterally, within or outside the OAS, with subregional groups or individual states.

The dream of hope that has lifted the Americas for almost five centuries must be revitalized by our generation. We are entering another new world as strange and challenging as that found by the first settlers on America's shores. With imagination, we can build in this Hemisphere the model of that larger world community which must be our ultimate goal.

As Victor Hugo once wrote, "The main highway lies open. May America travel it, and the world will follow."

* * * * * *

The Secretary
of State

Statement

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE:
OUR COMMON FUTURE

Secretary Henry A. Kissinger at the luncheon for the Foreign Ministers and U.N. Permanent Representatives from Latin America, at the Center for Inter-American Relations.

This is the third year I have enjoyed the considerable honor as Secretary of State of the United States of meeting with you for lunch at this Center for Inter-American Relations. I do so this time, as before, as an expression of the importance that we, the people of the United States, attach to our friendship with our fellow nations of the Western Hemisphere.

The Western Hemisphere has for centuries represented the hope of mankind. And so it does today. The United States is convinced that if we and our Latin American friends, with whom we have a tradition of political cooperation, can solve the pressing problems of the modern age we can once again be a beacon to humanity.

It makes a difference to the people of the United States that the nations of the hemisphere share a common heritage. We were born in the same struggle against foreign domination and colonial tyranny. We have a proud history of mutual support in time of trouble. We have a generation of successful practical experience with mechanisms of cooperation on our political and economic challenges.

Two years ago I suggested that we begin a dialogue for a more creative cooperation on the basis of mutual respect to meet the new challenges this age. This was not a slogan or a momentary shift of mood. Our purpose was, and must be, to

September 30, 1975

New York, N.Y.

Bureau of Public Affairs
Office of Media Services

transform the affairs of the nations of the Americas for the decades to come. The road ahead will be long. Deep-seated change is never easy. But the spirit which the nations of the hemisphere have brought to the effort gives me great hope and gives us all a bright prospect.

Our initiative has had two objectives:

*First*, as I said at the outset 2 years ago, it was right that we should put aside the bitterness of old political disputes. The proposal was a way of saying that we must break with the mutually misdirected monologues which so often marred our relations in the past and move forward in a new spirit to address our common problems.

*Second*, our effort had to be inspired by a broader and positive vision of the future of this hemisphere. It was, and is, clear to all that the goals we share in this era—peace, prosperity, and justice—call for a new intensity of cooperation; hence our mutual effort will require regular and candid consultation.

Let me touch on what we have done in these two areas since we met the first time.

*First*, to eliminate the political vestiges of the past:

* We have modified the Rio Treaty to make it more responsive to the will of the majority. We have applied the modified principle to the issue of collective sanctions against Cuba, thereby removing a divisive issue from our agenda.

* The United States and Panama have made good progress toward a modernized canal treaty

PR 507

2

which will accommodate the interests and aspira-
tions of both countries. We have no doubt that
these negotiations should proceed to a successful
conclusion based on justice and equality. I am con-
vinced that the balanced treaty that we and
Panama will achieve will be approved by the over-
whelming majority of the American people.

* Disputes over control of the seas are another traditional problem in our relations. We are beginning to make headway on this as well. The discussions that will begin shortly among interested governments can lead to a regional agreement on a regime for tuna fishing in the eastern Pacific and defuse what has been a longstanding and needless complication to hemispheric cooperation.

* At the same time we wish to work with Latin America on the overall shape of the future international law of the sea. Two months ago in Montreal I set forth a comprehensive U.S. position for the next phase of this crucial negotiation. We look forward to substantial and concrete progress at the next law of the sea session in March. This is a matter of fundamental political importance to the nations of this hemisphere and around the world.

* Another important issue has been the rights and obligations of foreign investors in your economies. There are differing perspectives on this issue, naturally, arising from our respective interests and histories. These differences cannot be expected to disappear magically at the first attempt at a solution. But as I pointed out before the Seventh Special Session [of the U.N. General Assembly], the United States believes there are vast resources available in the channel of private investment and our common aims should be to work out agreed principles of conduct on the basis of sovereign equality, mutual respect, and national dignity. The United States is prepared to have intensive consultations on this subject within the OAS [Organization of American States] and to discuss the issue as well in international forums. Meanwhile, we will deal with individual cases as they arise, in the light of our complementary interest in increasing the flow of capital and technology to Latin America through all available means. And the United States will work with the attitude that we should not permit these individual problems to disrupt our important overall relationships.

But beyond these specific steps forward, we

are pleased at the remarkable improvement on
both sides in the spirit and tenor of our discus-
sions. In the many forums where our work t
gether is carried out, and perhaps most notably the
OAS, it seems to me that the character of our
deliberations has markedly changed. Ritualistic
invocation of empty abstractions has given way to
serious, informal, and frank discourse about con-
crete issues. Ideological sloganeering has subsided;
the overheated rhetoric of North-South confronta-
tion has diminished. Procedures have been adapted
to solve problems. We have thus been able to
clarify our differences and find realistic solutions
where our interests converge.

Let me now turn to the second area of our
common endeavor, our cooperation for economic
and social progress:

The dramatic evidence of our global economic
interdependence in the past 2 years has compli-
cated our regional relationship. Many issues
important to that relationship, such as commodity
agreements and access to markets, can be resolved
effectively only in a global forum in the context of
the current discussion of relations between the
developed and the developing countries. We must
find these solutions. We in the Western Hemisphere
can work to shape these new global arrangements
so that they are responsive to our common needs.

Latin America's needs and opportunities are
unique in the developing world. By and large, your
countries are among the most advanced of the
developing world. But this higher stage of develop-
ment has its own difficulties. Because you are more
industrialized and have created more complex and
more open economies, your countries are perhaps
more vulnerable to fluctuations in export earnings,
to sudden increases in the cost of imported inter-
mediate goods, and to the ebb and flow of private
capital.

The arbitrary oil price rises and the world
recession have damaged the economic prospects of
every nation. The world community has shown
some awareness of the needs of the very poorest
countries, and the industrialized nations have put
in place some emergency measures to meet those
needs. It is time now that the world community
address itself to the problems of development
peculiar to Latin America and that it enlarge the
opportunities for growth of the economies here if
this hemisphere which are embarked on the
experience of industrialization.

3

It was for these reasons that in our initiative the Special Session I stressed measures which are particularly relevant to Latin America:

* I recommended creation of a $10 billion development security facility within the International Monetary Fund to address what is the single most historic impediment to Latin America's development efforts: the violent fluctuations in export earnings which have distorted and unbalanced even the best laid of Latin America's development plans.

* I also supported the creation of a regional Latin American financial safety net to help cushion particular balance-of-payments emergencies within this hemisphere.

* I reiterated the importance of improved access to private capital markets and proposed an International Investment Trust. This is of particular importance for Latin America, since several nations of the hemisphere are on the threshold of being active competitors for funds in capital markets, which would be of great benefit to the prospects for growth.

* I also proposed the organization, on a case-by-case basis, of new methods of producer-consumer cooperation with respect to specific commodities. Because of its historic dependence on commodity exports, Latin America has been in the forefront of the effort to develop commodity arrangements. We are prepared to discuss these issues.

* I was pleased to announce the forthcoming implementation of our generalized tariff preferences scheme, which was designed from the beginning with Latin America's needs in mind.

The U.S. Government is gratified that these proposals were received in the Special Session in a serious and constructive way. We look forward to further discussions of the details. We are prepared to have special consultations with our Western Hemisphere partners before negotiations in wider forums.

These will be the attitudes and hopes we will bring to our relations with your countries in the months ahead. But we are more and more aware that no single policy can take into full account the

rich complexity of Latin America and the Caribbean. However helpful the regional concept may be, it is in the end an abstraction. We do not conduct relations with abstractions. We conduct relations with distinct nations.

We will continue to do so in this hemisphere, guided by the common challenge and the cooperative attitudes toward all which I have described. But we will not forget that each of your countries is different. Each is worthy of our respect and attention. Each has its own problems and its own national values and aspirations. I pledge to you our best efforts to try to understand, and to be as responsive as we can, to each distinctive set of national interests. We will not surrender to a single formula our desire for warm and productive relations with each nation in the hemisphere.

Excellencies and friends: In this, the Western Hemisphere, we share a legacy from the past; we share the anguish of the present; we share a promise for the future. The world has entered a challenging era. But nowhere on this planet is there a better prospect that mankind can master the future than here among the family of American nations. We are diverse, and we cherish our identities; yet we share a common heritage, and our destinies depend on our collaboration. The Americas are synonymous with hope. The dream that has inspired our peoples for 5 centuries must be rekindled by our generation. What we do here in the Western Hemisphere has a meaning not only for ourselves but for a world that needs some proof of what free peoples working together can accomplish. It is in our power to fashion a common vision for the future.

During the coming year, the nations of this hemisphere will be celebrating the 150th anniversary of their first inter-American conference, called by Simon Bolivar, and the 200th anniversary of the United States. There is no more fitting time than this to rededicate ourselves to the dream of the Americas.

Excellencies and friends, please join me in a toast to the peoples of the Western Hemisphere, and to our common future. May we strengthen our collaboration in the pursuit of a freer, more just, and more generous world.

[L]

The Secretary
of State

Speech

June 6, 1976

Santo Domingo

Bureau of Public Affairs

Office of Media Services

STRENGTHENING THE HEMISPHERIC BOND

Secretary Henry A. Kissinger at a luncheon hosted by President Joaquin Balaguer.

I appreciate very much the warm welcome
you have given me.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to visit
the Dominican Republic. This beautiful island
holds a special meaning for all the peoples of the
Americas. For here culminated the most momen-
tous voyage of discovery in all human history and
here began the modern history of our hemisphere.

A great chronicler of Columbus' voyages, the
late Samuel Eliot Morison, pointed out that the
most remarkable aspect of Columbus' enterprise
was its incredible faith in its ultimate success. The
journey that ended on your shores was, above all,
the product of spiritual courage, of a daring to
search for an objective whose very existence could
only be proven through faith. Belief in the future is
the very symbol and meaning of the Americas—the
bold readiness to encounter the future and the con-
fident faith that human exertion, when directed by
principle and liberty, guarantees progress. With all
our differences ours has always been the hemis-
phere in which a frontier has always been a chal-
lenge and not a limit—where man came to find
dignity and human fulfillment.

It was in a spirit of commitment to our
unique hemispheric bond, with a readiness for
shared endeavor and faith in the success of our
common future, that I visited Latin America four
months ago. And it is in this spirit that I begin my
second trip to Latin America this year here in the
Dominican Republic—to continue the work we
began in February, to strengthen by consultations
and concrete proposals the impetus of improving
relations between the United States and the na-
tions of Latin America, and to help make our
hemisphere a model of what interdependent
nations can achieve by cooperative effort. To reach

that lofty objective, we will need faith; and if I
may put it in terms which will be familiar to you,
we will also need hope and occasionally a good bit
of charity toward each other.

The United States has always regarded its rela-
tionship with Latin America as a central element in
its national life—not solely as a matter of foreign
policy, for too much of our history derives from
Spanish-speaking settlers and too many of our
citizens are of Latin origin, for such a relationship
to be characterized as "foreign."

The sources of our special bond are manifold:
The epic of discovery and settlement; our peoples'
struggles for national independence; our common
interest in shielding our countries from external
intrusion; our work together to build international
structures for cooperation and economic progress;
our commitment to human dignity; and above all
our deep cultural and personal ties.

The depth of these bonds goes beyond institu-
tions; they penetrate the soul. The United States
has always felt with Latin America a special inti-
macy and close friendship. Today, when our coun-
tries are deeply involved in world affairs, even
when our perceptions and interests are not always
identical, we continue to draw upon a particular
warmth in our personal relationships and an excep-
tional respect and regard for each other's views and
concerns.

The partnership in our hemisphere—shaped by
history, tradition, and common interest—was for-
malized, by and large, in a series of treaties and
impelled by organizational machinery, dedicated to
peace and security. This shared commitment, given
form in the Organization of American States
[OAS], is still indispensable to our partnership.

Today the evolution of the hemisphere and
the world impel us to expand the range of our
concerns beyond the traditional agenda of security
and peace. It is fortunate that our relationship is so

2

deep that it can comfortably accommodate the
broad range of human preoccupations.

We have come to understand that, while we
must remain strong in our dedication to the peace
and security of this hemisphere, we are at the same
time challenged by a new agenda of development
issues. The growing role of the nations of this
hemisphere in the global economy and in world
forums dealing with development issues and their
unique position as the most developed of the devel-
oping nations provide an unprecedented opportuni-
ty to shape the problems of independence.

To reflect these new perceptions, I pledged
last February that the United States would:

* Take special cognizance of the distinctive
requirements of the more industrialized economies
of Latin America and of the region as a whole—in
the context of our efforts to help shape a more
equitable international order;

* Assist directly the neediest nations in the
hemisphere afflicted by poverty and natural dis-
aster;

* Support Latin American regional and subre-
gional efforts to organize for cooperation and inte-
gration;

* Negotiate on the basis of parity and dignity
our specific differences with each and every state
to solve problems before they become conflicts;

* Enforce our commitment to collective securi-
ty and to maintain regional integrity against at-
tempts to undermine solidarity, threaten inde-
pendence, or export violence; and

* Work to modernize the inter-American
system to respond to the needs of our times and
give direction to our common action.

Since February the United States has worked
hard to make progress in each of these areas. We
have introduced trade, investment, and technology
proposals of special relevance to the countries of
this hemisphere at global forums in Paris and
Nairobi. We have responded to the courageous
efforts of the Guatemalan people to recover from
the earthquake that devastated their land. We have
provided fresh support to subregional cooperation
in Central America and are exploring ways of relat-
ing more effectively to the Andean Pact. And we
have not only intensified bilateral efforts with
several countries but have made a special effort to
prepare for the current meeting of the OAS Gener-
al Assembly, which provides a unique opportunity
to review our progress together and give it common
direction.

I look forward to discussing these and other
recent global and regional events with my col-

leagues at the General Assembly, and I shall be
putting forward additional proposals on a number
of key issues to further our efforts on a multi-
lateral regional basis as well.

A major element in this second trip is that it
builds naturally on the first: In February I was not
only able to state our aims but to listen to, and
gain some understanding of, your concerns—
concerns over trade, the transfer of technology,
and regional cooperation. The proposals we plan to
present at Santiago reflect that understanding and
respond to those concerns—and thus represent con-
crete steps in our longstanding partnership.

Two subjects that are high on the interna-
tional agenda are especially relevant—trade and
technology.

Trade

The United States is fully aware that trade is
the indispensable engine of growth for the nations
of the hemisphere and that the United States, and
the other developed countries, are the most signifi-
cant trading partners of the region. Trade is the
source of most of Latin America's foreign ex-
change and so is essential if Latin America is to
acquire the imported capital goods which are vital
to future industrialization. But trade is, at the same
time, the most serious point of national
vulnerability to external circumstance. Cycles of
boom and bust, fueled by abrupt fluctuations in
the prices of commodities like sugar and coffee, tin
and copper, have plagued the development struggle
in the Americas for decades.

We are dedicated to the search for effective
solutions to the problems of international com-
modity marketing, as I made clear in my statement
to the UNCTAD IV in Nairobi a few weeks ago.
And we are, as recent decisions by President Ford
under the Trade Act have shown, equally dedicated
to a more liberal global trading system in which
Latin America will have greater opportunity to
expand its earnings from nontraditional manufac-
tured export sales.

In February I pledged that the United States
would support Latin America's drive for broadened
participation in the international economy as a
means to assure stable growth. During this visit, at
the General Assembly, I shall:

* Make clear our determination to administer
our Trade Act in ways constantly more favorable
to Latin America's exports;

* Announce our willingness to explore with
Latin America ways in which, through our own
trade policies, we can offer incentives for more
liberal trade and greater integration in Latin
America;

3

(w)

* State our willingness next month at the multilateral trade negotiations in Geneva to consider special safeguards treatment for certain developing countries and in other ways to press the trade interests of Latin America at the Geneva conference;

* Explore several means of expanding Western Hemisphere commodity production and exports; and

* Propose a new inter-American consultative mechanism on trade so that the inter-American system shall enjoy, for the first time, an open, continuing forum for dialogue on this, the most significant economic relationship of the nations of this hemisphere.

## Technology

Economic development, in the end, means simply the expansion of output and the improvement in efficiency of the workers, the farms, and the factories of our nations. In today's world it is impossible to conceive of any long-term growth in a nation which is without modern technology—the capability of exploiting the insights and discoveries of the modern scientific method for the betterment of man's conditions. Latin America's development aspirations turn on technology; but, as I emphasized during my visit in February, it must be technology compatible with the conditions of Latin America, nurtured by Latin Americans in Latin American institutions and capable of thrusting the economies of Latin America into the competitive forefront of the world's markets.

At the General Assembly this time, I shall:

* Announce measures to expand Latin America's access to our own National Technical Information Service;

* Detail an increased U.S. assistance program for the coming year for the development of indigenous technology capability within Latin America;

* Announce that we are opening a technology exchange service for Latin America, to service requests for information about public and privately owned technology in the United States;

* Indicate that we are prepared to mount a pilot program of practical technology exchanges between private Latin American and U.S. companies; and

* In general elaborate for Latin America the technology initiatives which I suggested in Nairobi recently and those which were approved in the technology resolution at UNCTAD IV.

These steps, which we are prepared to refine and implement in consultation with the other

countries of the hemisphere, will not only increase the prosperity of our individual countries; they will increase their capacity to define and maximize the benefits of international cooperation and progress. Above all they should strengthen the spirit of co-operation and partnership.

## Human Rights

The origins of our hemispheric traditions and the values of our civilization tell us, however, that material progress is not sufficient for the human personality. We of the Americas have a special obligation to ourselves and the world to maintain and advance international standards of justice and freedom.

In February I stated our conviction that basic human rights must be preserved, cherished, and defended in this hemisphere—for if they cannot be preserved, cherished, and defended here where the rights and promise of the individual have played such a prominent historic role, then they are in jeopardy everywhere.

During this trip I shall stress that the struggle for human dignity is central, both to national development and to international cooperation, and I shall propose a strengthened role for the Inter-American Human Rights Commission.

## Our Inter-American System

We have many forms of cooperation; our bilateral and global interactions are increasing constantly. To give them an added regional dimension, no organization is more important than the Organization of American States.

Last February I pledged that we would work to modernize the inter-American system to respond to the needs of our times and give direction to our common action. During my current trip I shall urge that we increase the frequency of our consultations through the General Assembly and eliminate those other elements of the OAS structure that have become anachronistic, and I shall propose that these reforms of the OAS be considered by a special intergovernmental working group on the charter.

Over the course of the next year, these steps should lead to a more flexible and responsive instrument of cooperation between the United States and the countries of Latin America and help bring the drawn-out reform debate to a successful conclusion.

These proposals will be offered as sincere, serious attempts to respond to Latin American suggestions.

History has proven time and again how difficult it is for those living in an age of revolutionary

4

change to perceive the forces taking shape around them, much less exercise influence over their direction and impact. I believe that we here in this hemisphere, because of our partnership of shared endeavor and straightforward consultation, are closer than any other group of nations to understanding the problems we face, more able to discuss them in the spirit of a long tradition of cooperation, and more willing to take the necessary steps to master our common destiny. With good will and firm commitment we can make a record of progress in this hemisphere on the crucial issues of an interdependent world which will be a model and an inspiration to nations everywhere.

The peoples of the Americas, who pioneered these unexplored continents and built nations under conditions of great adversity, know that progress does not come easily. But we know as well that cooperative and committed effort—and faith in the future—are the surest means to progress.

Mr. President, the year 1976 has a special meaning for both of us. In the United States it is a Bicentennial year of renewed dedication to our ideals. For you it is a year of homage to a great Dominican leader—Juan Pablo Duarte. Like Jefferson and Bolivar, Juarez and Lincoln, Duarte has given the Americas a legacy of love of mankind and country.

You, Mr. President, a distinguished historian and a scholar of Duarte, have had an opportunity which was tragically denied to him. For nearly 10 years, you have been allowed to direct the fortunes of your country—to lead it away from political and economic unrest toward peace, prosperity, and liberty.

During the first four years of this decade alone, the people of the Dominican Republic en-

joyed a real annual increase in per capita income of nearly 8 percent, one of the highest rates of progress not just in this hemisphere but the world. This growth has enabled you to resist subsequent dislocations in the global economy and to make great strides in institutional development and culture as well.

In less fortunate times, when stability and confidence were threatened, you addressed a message to the young people of your country. You reminded them of the ideals and aspirations of Duarte and of their obligations as inheritors of his hope. You said:

> ... To chaos and to lack of confidence by some in our own future, we can offer in return political security in the present and in the future; to ignorant narrowness, we can offer our abundant confidence, our faith in progress, our permanent commitment to national conciliation and concord.

This is also a message to the hemisphere. It is a message of indomitable faith in the future worthy of the heritage and the proud achievement of this hemisphere.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I ask you to join me in the proposition that I propose a toast on behalf of the President and people of the United States to His Excellency, Dr. Joaquin Balaguer, President of the Dominican Republic; to the enduring friendship between our two countries; to the prosperity and well-being of the Dominican people; and to the voyage to the future upon which we in the Americas have embarked and which will lead us to a new world of peace, dignity, justice, and progress for all our peoples.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S.A.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20520

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
STA-501