25

Latin American Speech for delivery
in New Orleans, April 21, 1964.
(Drafted by Kissinger after
consultation with NAR, April 16,
1964)

I. A NEW DEDICATION TO THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE.

This award means a great deal to me for many reasons. Because it has
been given to so many distinguished friends of Latin America, I shall cherish
it particularly. Western Hemisphere relations have always been close to my
heart. The Western Hemisphere is not simply a geographic entity to me. It
calls to mind friendships in all your countries going back over a period of
thirty years.

The Pan American Press Seminar is attended, I am told, by editors from
Canada, the United States and sixteen Latin American countries. I can think of
no more appropriate forum to discuss the future of the Western Hemisphere.

In my view relationships in this Hemisphere have sporadically suffered
from neglect in United States foreign policy, and are currently showing signs of
dangerous deterioration.

This trend must be reversed. I urge this not as a doctrine of
geographical parochialism, but in the belief that the New World must demonstrate
the continuing vitality of its historic mission as a laboratory reflecting man's
highest political, social and moral aspirations.

In the last quarter of the 18th Century our forefathers forged a system
of government based on principles that reawakened the conscience and stirred the
imaginations and hopes of a troubled world.

It affirmed the concepts of equality of opportunity, the dignity of the
individual and the protection of his rights by constitutional representative
government.

These concepts inspired hopes throughout the Western World.

For a period, it seemed that the Western Hemisphere, which had contributed so much to the development of these political concepts, might pioneer also in using them to bridge national and regional boundaries.

At the end of the first quarter of the 19th Century, Simon Bolivar carried the vision of free democracy to Latin America. He added to it the stirring concept of a Western Hemisphere Confederation. Under Bolivar's leadership a meeting, which convened in Panama in 1826, drafted a Treaty of Union, League and Perpetual Confederation.

This remarkable document called upon all members to guarantee each other's defense. It provided for disenfranchisement of any country that departed from a republican form of government. To an extraordinary degree it anticipated most of the undertakings and procedural arrangements that were incorporated 122 years later in the Charter of the Organization of American States and in the Rio Pact of Mutual Security.

Bolivar invited the United States to participate in this convention, but the two U.S. delegates that were selected never arrived because Congress withheld approval.

Simon Bolivar correctly foresaw the central fact of our time. No nation -- not even the largest -- can realize the hopes of its people in isolation. But no structure can be vital if it is not based on the free consent and the active participation of its members. Ancient Greece foundered on this dilemma. Modern Europe nearly tore itself assunder before it understood the need for common effort.

And we, in the Western Hemisphere, have also failed to fulfill the vision
of Bolivar.

It would be painful to review in detail the errors of policy and
judgement and insight which have characterized Inter-American relations. There
have been many attempts to devise particular structures. But the missing
ingredient has been conviction and dedication to the idea of truly equal
partnership. Certainly, when crises were upon us, the nations of this Hemisphere
have generally rallied to concert their efforts. But the test of devotion is
the ability to show foresight and wisdom when the needs seem less pressing. And
that test most of our nations, certainly my own, have failed.

But we are not here to bemoan the past. We are still masters of our
future.

When Bolivar spoke, the need for his vision was real but not obvious.

Today, it is both real and obvious.

The need for unity is economic, military, political and moral.

-- The inter-dependence in trade between members of the Hemisphere is
increasing at an astounding rate. When I became U.S. Coordinator of
Inter-American Affairs in 1940, the annual international trade in
the Hemisphere totaled approximately two billion dollars. Today it
is approximately fifteen billion dollars, or an increase of 650 per
cent.

- 4 -

-- The demands of modern development also imply a new relationship among nations of the Hemisphere. There is need for investment, for the development of transportation, for nutrition and health programs, for joint efforts of education. These require human, natural and capital resources which can to some degree be quantitatively determined. But the process of development depends, above all, on the intangible qualities which produce innovation -- the motor power -- of any society.

If enough individuals can be stimulated to act on their own, and to mobilize their own and their neighbors' resources, the entire society will begin to move. When societies interact, the range of innovation expands geometrically. It is not the size of investment but the spirit animating it which is ultimately decisive. And individual, uncoordinated efforts will dissipate energies.

-- The need for common defense is greater today than it was in Bolivar's time or even at the signing of the Act of Chapultepec. In the nuclear age, freedom is indeed indivisible.

-- The growth of regional associations in Europe creates an imperative demand for a similar pattern in our own Hemisphere. In a world organizing itself increasingly on regional lines, the Western Hemisphere cannot compete or even survive on a purely national basis. And just as European political unity emerged from a deliberate strategy of fostering economic and functional cooperation, so the cohesion of the Western Hemisphere should grow out of ever closer collaborative efforts to meet the needs of our peoples.

The ultimate challenge transcends practical considerations. The free world today suffers from an obsession with current crises with which it deals on an *ad hoc* basis. In concentrating on the symptoms, the free peoples magnify the causes.

The free world today requires above all a vision of the future. Throughout history each great achievement was a vision before it became a reality. It was a dream of some before it became a fact for all.

This is what the nations of the Western Hemisphere could do if we rededicate ourselves to creating the dream of a New World.

## II. A FRESH VISION.

It would be tempting to outline a program embodied in a specific number of proposals. And indeed later on I will refer to some areas of policy which seem to me to require particular attention.

However, such an approach would miss the essential point.

The need in our Western Hemisphere policy is not primarily for a change of specific programs but for a change in attitude. We require more vision; not more expedients.

I have criticized this Administration for a lack of objectives. I have questioned the adequacy of its concepts for translating objectives into policy. I consider its programs random and haphazard.

Nowhere is this more true than in the Administration's Western Hemisphere policy.

I have stated what our objective should be: the revitalization of the New World by a true Western Hemisphere partnership.

It should be based on respect for the worth and dignity of individuals and nations growing out of the Judeo-Christian concept of the dignity and brotherhood of man.

U.S. programs, therefore, require a new spirit based on the following:

**Foremost must be a revitalization of the concept of consultation for common objectives and joint programs.** All of our alliances are in disarray because consultation too often takes the form of elaborating an American blueprint. No self-respecting ally will feel responsibility for programs that have not been made his own through active participation.

This has been the major difficulty with the Alliance for Progress.

The Alliance for Progress was announced by the Administration in ringing terms of extravagant promise. But instead of collaborating with our Latin American

partners in developing common objectives and programs, we presented them with
a made-in-USA list of reforms, adherence to which was made the condition of
assistance. Our partners were not given an adequate opportunity to judge the
applicability of these measures to their particular circumstances or to develop
a truly multilateral response. We left the channeling of requests to a multi-
plicity of largely uncoordinated U.S. agencies, each operating under its own
criteria and each applying its own supervision.

The result was an almost complete failure to communicate any sense of a
truly joint effort. Much of the friction in the Alliance for Progress is due to
the fact that the goals for the program have been set for our allies rather than
developed with them.

A second requirement is for foresight. The nations of the Western Hemisphere working together can better anticipate common problems and develop joint programs to meet them. Those who do not master events become their prisoner.

The Organization of American States (OAS) has not become an effective instrument for long-range planning. When the OAS was created, through the Act of Chapultepec in 1945, proposed by the wise Foreign Minister of Colombia, Alberto Lleras Camargo, we all had high hopes. But since then the OAS has not had the support to organize itself to meet the pressing social and economic needs of this Hemisphere. And therefore it has been ineffective in dealing with crises.

A prerequisite for effective cooperative effort is a conscious and deliberate dedication to build mutual confidence by all nations -- particularly by the United States. A patronizing attitude breeds irresponsibility. Respect is an intangible quality but it is quickly sensed by proud, intelligent and sensitive people. Building

confidence requires that partners have an opportunity to express their views
before action is taken on matters which concern us all. It is essential that each
partner tries to see and understand the other point of view. Above all the
building of confidence presupposes consistency and predictability in our actions.

Our relations with Panama can serve as an example of how not to build
confidence. A popular United States Ambassador left in frustration at the lack
of adequate response of the Administration. Despite all warnings of impending
crisis, the post then remained unfilled for six months. When the riots occurred,
no U.S. Ambassador was on the spot. We then engaged in months of undignified and
unseemly semantic squabbling with Panama through an OAS committee. The confusion
of our policy was made manifest when on two occasions the White House counter-
manded commitments the State Department had already formally made.

This is no way to achieve the unity of the Western Hemisphere.

An effective United States Western Hemisphere policy would never have
allowed such a situation to arise in the first place.

In short, if we want to construct a New World, we should have a vision
and methods that bring out the best in our partners.

It is in this spirit that I want to address myself to fourteen measures
that would begin to take us along this road.

### III. A WESTERN HEMISPHERE AGENDA.

The nations of the Western Hemisphere should establish common objectives to meet the aspirations of their peoples for peace, security and progress. Among the areas to be considered are: public health, nutrition and food supply, education, science, culture, information, transportation, and economic development including industrialization, the modernization of agriculture and the stimulation of private investment.

The following measures might help serve these common objectives.

#### A. Western Hemisphere Structure.

Institutions by themselves cannot create an attitude. Even less can they be a substitute for an attitude.

They can, however, give symbolic expression to common aspirations. And they can create a framework -- sometimes even supply an impetus -- for collaborative efforts.

This is why I favor the encouragement of institutions which give expression and substance to the interdependence of nations in the Western Hemisphere.

These institutions should not be designed on any doctrinaire basis. Some may well include the entire Western Hemisphere; others may embrace more limited areas uniting the countries and functions primarily concerned. But all of them will derive their vitality from the commitment to them of *all* participants. It is the essence of partnership for each nation to be free to advance proposals but also to be free from having solutions imposed on them.

- 10 -

The following areas seem to me worthy of particular attention:

1. The Western Hemisphere should make every effort to induce Canada to join in the Organization of American States and the other Inter-American programs for joint political and economic action.

2. The existing organs of the Organization of the American States are exclusively representative of the foreign ministers of the member states. But the peoples of the Hemisphere should be heard -- and ideally through representatives who are popularly elected to national legislatures.

To meet this need, the nations of the Western Hemisphere could create under the Organization of American States a popular Assembly on the model of the Assembly of the Western European Union. It should be composed of members of parliaments from all OAS countries and Canada should it wish to participate. The Assembly should discuss any problems of common concern and should recommend action. Positive proposals for joint action coming from the Assembly would serve as the agenda for more formal consideration by official governmental agencies. Though the views of such an Assembly would be advisory only, the reputation of its members could give it, and through it the people, a powerful voice in the creation of a unified Western Hemisphere.

3. The nations of the Hemisphere should revitalize the Organization of American States to restore to it the high purpose and opportunity for accomplishment which its founders sought to give it.

- 11 -

a. The Foreign Ministers of the Organization of American States should meet annually with a formal agenda and study papers proposed by the OAS and national staffs. At the present time this group meets generally only under crisis conditions.

b. As various forms of regionalism develop in the Western Hemisphere, the OAS could be recast to take account of it. Thus particular groupings such as the Central American Common Market might be extended representation as regional entities.

c. The Economic and Social Council of the OAS should be given a more active and meaningful role in the joint consideration of the goals of Hemispheric development and of the programs by which the goals are pursued.

d. The Inter-American Development Commission and its twenty-one national commissions should be re-activated to serve the cause of economic development throughout the Hemisphere. This Commission was abandoned after World War II.

4. The United States should lend full encouragement and all practicable assistance to the two regional economic accords that have been established to eliminate barriers to trade between Latin American countries and provide greater market scope for industrial development. The success of the Latin America Free Trade Area and the Central American Common Market arrangements can make a substantial contribution to economic progress and the fostering of sound economic practice. In the long run the success of these institutions might make it easier to work toward the goal of building toward an economic accord for the Western Hemisphere as a whole.

- 12 -

As the economies of Latin America grow, the nations of the Hemisphere ought to negotiate a comprehensive trade accord. Whether this takes the form of a Western Hemisphere Common Market or a Hemisphere Free Trade Area in which we associate with a Latin American Common Market would depend on consultations. In cooperatively defining the details of a Western Hemisphere trade association, all the nations of the Hemisphere, including the United States, must take account of particular problems raised by the association of developed and developing economies. This suggests that the United States might well consider establishing a more favorable timetable for reduction in its tariffs than it asks from its partners.

## B. Development Planning and Trade.

The current approach to Western Hemisphere development is inadequate. Because of its unilateral character, the Alliance for Progress is regarded throughout Latin America as another Yankee program, with made-in-the-United States planning, procedures, goals, and reform prescriptions formulated in general terms that often are not applicable to widely varied national situations.

The U.S. has produced this self-defeating unilateralism by handling all applications, negotiations and supervision arrangements through a multiplicity of more or less uncoordinated U.S. agencies on the same nation-to-nation basis that existed before the Alliance was formed.

- 13 -

The unilateral conception of the Alliance for Progress and the
resulting lack of Latin American enthusiasm has been reflected in
inappropriate organization.

Finally, the Alliance for Progress has largely ignored the vital
importance of the private sector of the economy. Eighty per cent of all
production south of the Rio Grande is in private enterprise. (The
re-activation of the Inter-American Development Commission which I have
already mentioned could do much to restore a proper emphasis to the
importance of private investment.)

In view of these shortcomings of the current approach the following
proposals seem in order.

5. The United States should call an Inter-American Conference to develop a coherent program and organization for economic and social development in Latin America. The purpose of the Conference would be to establish the goals and to define the concepts for a constructive development program which has the enthusiastic support of those who are seeking development.

While past or present programs should not be abandoned without
careful consideration, neither should their existence be a deterrent to
real progress.

This Conference should be preceded by extensive planning through
consultation. The conclusions of the Conference should reflect the
thinking of the group as a whole.

6. Pending such an Inter-American Development Conference, existing development programs should not be allowed to bog down. To assure proper emphasis to the needs of development the Central International Committee of the Alliance for Progress, CIAP, should be placed under the Organization of American States. CIAP should be given major responsibility in developing joint programs and sifting requests.

7. The role of private investment in development should be adequately recognized. Through the years the U.S. attitude toward economic development has alternated between major stress on government investment and major stress on private investment. In so doing the fundamental point has been obscured. An effective government is necessary to provide the basic conditions of development, including private investment. But the healthy participation of the private sector in development -- the initiative and vitality of free enterprise -- is an essential element. Measures which should be encouraged are:

- Institutions for the mobilization of local capital for constructive development investment.

- Credit institutions to finance agricultural modernization, housing development and business expansion;

- Stock markets to facilitate equity investments;

- Mutual funds to encourage the flow of savings into ownership of local enterprise;

- Currency stabilization measures;

- Programs to curb the inflationary spiral.

- 15 -

8. Any development program in the Western Hemisphere will be in constant jeopardy unless stability is achieved in world prices for the raw material exports which form the largest portion of the Latin American economy.

a. The European Common Market may establish preferential trading relationships with its "Associated Overseas States" which would, in effect, discriminate against the products of the developing countries of the Western Hemisphere. Through the appropriate channels of the Organization of the American States the nations of the Western Hemisphere should formulate a common position on trade policy toward the European Common Market. In its relations with the EEC, the United States should vigorously pursue the common policy of the Hemisphere. Part of this program might well be that preferences should be extended by **all** major developed markets to **all** developing area markets to avoid further partitioning of the world into neo-colonial compartments.

b. Similarly the nations of the Hemisphere should forge a common policy on the stabilization of world commodity prices -- and all the nations of the Hemisphere should support that common policy at the forthcoming session of GATT. (The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade).

9. Economic development frequently can best be achieved through regional development programs which involve many nations in cooperation for the common good. A regional grouping which has always commended itself to me is an East Andean Development Program. The seven governments of the region of the Eastern slope of the Andes Mountains might consider

establishing, with U.S. support, a public East Andean Development Corporation for the purpose of regional development of the area. The tasks of the Corporation would be the clearing of the fertile East Andean plateau, the creation of avenues of transportation for agricultural products from the plateau to the coastal population and ports, and the relocation of native population groups to the region. Such a joint effort could well serve as a "pilot project" for regional development in the Hemisphere.

10. Education is, of course, a vital element of development. Among the many areas for international cooperation on education, the nations of the Hemisphere could beneficially pursue the development of regional educational institutions on the model of the University of the Andes. For example, a regional university for Central America and a Latin American Technical Institute suggest themselves.

### C. Science and Technology.

The future of our Hemisphere, its development and its defense are inevitably linked with the growth of science and technology. Science must be put in the service of truly joint Western Hemisphere efforts. We must anticipate the demands and the opportunities which the technological revolution presents to all our peoples.

- 17 -

11. In support of the common objectives of the Western Hemisphere the United States should negotiate for the construction of a new sea-level canal to replace the present Panama Canal, which is rapidly becoming unable to serve the needs of the Hemisphere. It is not only unable to accommodate some of the most modern naval vessels, but the volume of traffic soon may be greater than it can carry.

The construction of the Canal should be undertaken by the United States, but the project should be planned in cooperation with the Organization of American States -- for it will serve the whole Hemisphere. The use of nuclear energy would substantially reduce the cost of constructing the Canal.

12. In many areas of the Western Hemisphere there is a basic need for irrigation water. The nations of the Hemisphere should join together in a comprehensive program to find an economic means for the desalinization of sea water, including the use of solar and nuclear energy. Such a program might include the establishment of processing plants in Peru, Chile and Northern Brazil. This is among the most exciting adventures of the current search of science for the keys to a better life for all men. To make today's deserts into rich and fertile land is not an unreal dream -- it is possible, in our lifetime. The peoples of all our countries must be able to draw confidence from the peaceful and beneficial applications of science.

- 18 -

D. Effective Organization within the U.S. Government for Hemisphere Relations.

If this nation is going to participate effectively in the implementation
of a vision of a Hemisphere of nations working together for their common good,
the United States Government must be organized for the task.

Two specific reorganization steps are required at the federal level:

13. All programs related to the development of a united Hemisphere should be the concern of a new Office of Western Hemisphere Affairs -- an independent agency organized for the specific purpose of serving the future of the Hemisphere.

At the present time the aid program, the information program and
other operating programs for the Hemisphere are handled under separate,
inadequately coordinated agencies. Other programs which are integrated
into global policies -- such as the food programs of the Agriculture
Department -- should be more closely attuned to overall objectives of
the Hemisphere. Similarly, an Office of Western Hemisphere Affairs could
be charged with assisting private institutions, industry, and labor for
joint efforts with their counterparts in Latin America.

14. A new post of Undersecretary of State for Inter-American Affairs should be created to mark the special importance of this Hemisphere relationship and to bring into focus at top policy level our relations with the nations of the hemisphere.

IV. DEMOCRACY IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE.

Much of the discussion of Western Hemispheric relations concerns economic
development. But economic development, vital as it is, is not enough. Neither
technical competence, nor organization, nor highways, nor food, nor the march
of science by themselves can assure freedom.

Those who argue that economic development automatically produces democracy,
and those who say that all we should care for is stability and economic progress,
regardless of the government which brings it about, do no service to our nation
and our Hemisphere -- for theirs is a counsel of despair.

In the first place, efficiency can never be the only goal for free peoples.
By itself, materialism destroys liberty. Despite all wishful thinking, there is
no inevitable connection between material well-being and democratic values. Imperial
Japan was the most industrialized nation in Asia; Hitler's Germany the most indus-
trialized on the European continent.

The historical fact is that in each of the great Western democracies, the
process of industrialization was preceded by the acceptance of democratic values.
The process of industrialization, to be sure, strengthened those values, but they
were there to be strengthened. When democratic values are unknown, even more
where they are actively suppressed, industrialization may merely refine the tools
of tyranny.

And secondly, we greatly underestimate human nature if we believe that
the people of Latin America seek only material comfort. We must not be so naive
as to think that the appeal of Communism is merely "something for nothing." On
the contrary, it is the appeal of a system that offers philosophical answers. It
offers "truth" to peoples in search of stability.

However fallacious they are, we cannot fight ideas by talk of material
well-being. All people want values which give meaning to their physical

- 19 -

- 20 -

existence. We cannot afford to let freedom and democracy fail in the Americas.

In his recent provocative speech Senator Fulbright suggested that this country should think of the struggle with Communism in empirical rather than moral terms. But it is not the mechanization or affluence of our society alone that inspire others. It is the values of human dignity which we hold dear.

We should not be embarrassed to affirm our dedication to the goal of
making democracy the wave of the future;

-- By making it a reality for all in our own land;

-- By demonstrating to the world a faith which is valid for the
realization of human values everywhere;

-- By measuring its worth in spiritual and not in material terms;

-- By finding in it the cause for the imagination and initiative and
industry that it gave our forefathers.

A United Western Hemisphere, dedicated to the common goals of freedom and human dignity must face the reality that the triumph of the free is not automatic. Only as we seize our opportunities can we realize our destiny. If we turn our backs on the hopes and aspirations of the 400 million people of the Western Hemisphere for the sake of individual comfort, we will lose first our soul and then our comfort, too.

To those who warn that the quest is futile -- or the journey too long -- or the destination too uncertain -- we must reply that great things have not been done by the timid or the doubting or the weary. The future belongs to those who embrace it in the present.

Let the historians write a story of how free men met their challenge. Let us, here and now, put our hearts and our minds and our energies together to the

FOR RELEASE IN THE AFTERNOON PAPERS OF TUESDAY, APRIL 21, 1964

ROBERT L. McMANUS, PRESS SECRETARY TO GOVERNOR ROCKEFELLER

EXCERPTS OF REMARKS BY GOVERNOR NELSON A. ROCKFELLER
PREPARED FOR DELIVERY AT PAN AMERICAN PRESS SEMINAR,
JUNG HOTEL, NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA, APRIL 21, 1964

New Orleans is a major gateway linking the United States with Latin America. And this Pan American Press Seminar is a significant inter-American meeting. This is, therefore, a unique opportunity to discuss U.S.-Latin American relationships in the framework of the overall Western Hemisphere setting of which they are such an important part.

It is my view that the unity and strength of the Americas are showing signs of dangerous deterioration. I am here to urge that in our common interest steps be taken immediately to reverse this trend. In so doing I do not advocate a narrow regionalism. I urge this action in the belief that unless the New World can demonstrate a continuing vitality to serve its hostoric mission as a laboratory reflecting men's highest political, social and moral aspirations, our chances of helping achieve a world order of such a character are poor indeed.

Here in the United States, in the last quarter of the 18th Century our forefathers forged on the North Atlantic seaboard a system of government dedicated to human dignity and equal opportunity -- that awakened the conscience and stirred the imagination and the hope of freedom-lovin' men everywhere.

In the early 19th Century, Simon Bolivar brought a similar vision of freedom and democracy to South America. Following the wars of liberation he saw that the newly independent nations would not be strong enough individually to protect their own independence or provide for the needs of their own people from within their own borders alone. Therefore he proposed the stirring concept of a Western Hemisphere Confederation -- a free association of free peoples working together in their common interest.

Under Bolivar's leadership, a meeting which convened in Panama in 1826, drafted a Treaty of Union, League and Perpetual Confederation. This remarkable document called upon all members to guarantee each other's defense. It provided for disenfranchisement of any country that departed from a republican form of government. To an extraordinary degree it anticipated most of the undertakings and procedural arrangements that were incorporated 122 years later in the Charter of the Organization of American States and the Rio Pact of Mutual Security.

Despite many starts and some progress, we in the Western Hemisphere have yet to fulfill the great vision of Bolivar. There have been many attempts to devise machinery to give expression to Bolivar's concept.

But, we have not achieved to date a true hemispheric consensus nor the organization to implement it.

The urgency, however, is greater than ever before.

The need of this hemisphere is for unity within a political framework in which the free peoples of the Americas can associate in true partnership.

Effective continuing economic, social and military joint action in the long run depend upon the strength and vitality of the political framework.

- more -

Pan American Press Seminar

April 21, 1964

Economically, the inter-dependence among members of the hemisphere is increasing at an astounding rate. When I became U.S. Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs in 1940, the annual international trade in the hemisphere totalled approximately $ 2 billion. Today it is approximately $15 billion, or an increase of 650 per cent.

Socially, we have closer relationships than ever before thanks to fantastically improved transportation and communication, of which you gentlemen here convened today are a vital part.

Culturally, through the arts, music, language and literature we have spanned the vast reaches of our hemisphere.

Militarily, the threat from communist totalitarian imperialism poses the most serious danger in our history, reaffirming our common commitment to mutual defense of the Western Hemisphere.

However, we must face realistically the fact that a strong and stable Western Hemisphere political unity has not yet been achieved.

The post World War II period has shown the great value, indeed the necessity, of regional associations of free nations.

The growth of regional associations in Europe creates an imperative demand for a similar pattern in our own hemisphere. In a world organizing itself increasingly on regional lines, the Western Hemisphere cannot compete or even survive on a purely national basis. Just as European political unity is emerging in the wake of economic and functional cooperation, so the political cohesion of the Western Hemisphere must be built upon common objectives and closer collaborative efforts to meet the needs of our peoples.

## II. Common Goals for the Hemisphere

The history of the efforts to promote hemispheric unity over the years clearly demonstrates that there is no magic in machinery.

The lesson is clear.

Inter-American efforts to create a true political framework for the Western Hemisphere must be rooted in common goals developed through consultation. This is the key to true unity.

It must equally be based upon a genuine conviction of the necessity for hemispheric unity and cooperation and dedication to the idea of a true partnership of free nations.

The common goal must be to strengthen the forces of democracy and thus to make democracy secure in this hemisphere. This goal can be attained only through:

- Assuring human dignity, individual liberty and equal opportunity for all men in the New World;

- Providing for the self-determination of peoples;

- Promoting the economic growth and social progress of the entire hemisphere -- to raise the standard of living of all people throughout the Americas; and

- Insuring mutual security against military threats, subversions and sabotage.

(more)

Pan-American Press Seminar

April 21, 1964

Achievement of these objectives requires a consistent and continuing commitment to the basic goal and to a true cooperative partnership on the part of all the American Republics.

My chief criticisms of the Democratic administration's policy on Latin America are:

- Its lack of dedication to true Western Hemispheric unity;

- Its lack of consultation on a continuing basis with the other American Republics;

- Its unilateral and patronizing approach;

- Its sporadic interest and concern with Western Hemisphere affairs;

- Its lack of clear organization to deal with Inter-American affairs; and

- Its random and haphazard programs.

For example, the Alliance for Progress was announced on a uni-
lateral basis by the present Democratic administration in ringing
terms of extravagant promise. And then instead of collaborating
with our Latin American partners in developing common objectives
and programs, Washington presented them with a made-in-USA list of
reforms, adherence to which was made the condition of assistance.
Our partners were not given an adequate opportunity to judge the
applicability of these measures to their particular circumstances
or to develop a truly multilateral response. Washington left the
channeling of requests to a multiplicity of largely uncoordinated
U.S. agencies, each operating under its own criteria and each
applying its own supervision.

The result has been an almost complete failure to develop a
truly joint effort. Most of the friction in the Alliance for Pro-
gress is due to the fact that the goals for the program have been
set for our allies rather than developed with them.

Another example of why our relationships with the other American
Republics has deteriorated is to be found in recent U.S. relations
with Panama. A dedicated and popular United States Ambassador
resigned in frustration at the lack of adequate response by the
administration in Washington. Despite all warnings of impending
crisis, the post then remained unfilled for six months. When the
riots occurred in the Canal Zone, no U.S. Ambassador was on the
spot to deal with the situation.

The U.S. has since engaged in months of undignified and unseemly
semantic squabbling with Panama through an OAS committee. The confus-
ion of our policy was made manifest when on two occasions the White
House countermanded commitments the State Department had already
formally made.

This is surely no way to advance the unity of the Western
Hemisphere.

### III. <u>An Agenda for Action</u>

Therefore, I would like to propose an agenda for action
involving three Western Hemisphere Conferences.

(more)

Pan American Press Seminar

April 21, 1964

To restore Western Hemispheric unity based on a renewal of
respect and mutual trust and confidence and to develop the sound and
durable political framework necessary to achieve the common goals
of the Americas, I recommend the following:

1. A rededication by the United States to the Good Neighborhood Policy and the unity of the Americas. To participate effectively in hemisphere affairs and to help achieve the common goal, the United States Government must be organized for the task.

I recommend two specific reorganization steps:

a. The creation of a new post of Under Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs to mark the special importance of this hemisphere relationship and to bring into focus at top policy level our relations with the nations of the hemisphere.

b. The creation of a new Office of Inter-American Affairs
-- an independent agency organized for the specific
purpose of serving the future of the hemisphere.

All programs related to the development of a united hemis-
phere should be the concern of this new office and should either be
administered by or coordinated through this office.

At the present time the aid program, the information pro-
gram and other operating programs for the hemisphere are handled
under separate, inadequately coordinated agencies.

Other programs which are integrated into global policies --
such as the food programs of the Agriculture Department -- should be
more closely attuned to overall objectives of the hemisphere.

Similarly, an Office of Inter-American Affairs could be
charged with assisting private institutions, industry and labor for
joints efforts with the counterparts in Latin America.

2. A Conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the American Republics should be convened at the earliest possible date to consider, among other things, the following:

a. The revitalization of the Organization of American
States to restore to it the high purpose and opportunity
for accomplishment which its founders sought to give it.

-- The Foreign Ministers of the Organization of American
States should meet annually with a formal agenda
and study papers proposed by the OAS and national
staffs. At the present time this group meets
generally only under crisis conditions;

-- The Inter-American Defense Council should be given
a much more important role;

-- The Economic and Social Council of the OAS should be given a more active and meaningful role in the development of the goals for hemispheric economic and social progress and the programs by which the goals can be achieved;

-- The Central International Committee of the Alliance for Progress (CIAP) should be placed in the OAS;

(more)

Pan American Press Seminar

April 21, 1964

b. Specific measures to bring about stability in world prices for raw material exports which form the largest portion of the Latin American economy:

-- The European Common Market may establish preferential trading relationships with its "Associated Overseas States" which would, in effect, discriminate against the products of the developing countries of the Western Hemisphere. Through the appropriate channels of the Organization of American States the nations of the Western Hemisphere should formulate a common position of trade policy toward the European Common Market. In its relations with the EEC, the United States should vigorously pursue the common policy of the hemisphere. Part of this program might well be that preferences should be extended by all major developed markets to all developing area markets to avoid further partitioning of the world into neo-colonial compartments.

-- Similarly the nations of the hemisphere should forge a common policy on the stabilization of world commodity prices -- and all the nations of the hemisphere should support that common policy at the forthcoming session of GATT (The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade).

c. They should consider specific multi-nation projects to promote regional development programs among the American states, such as an East Andean Development Authority.

4. Construction of a new sea level canal using nuclear energy. The present Panama Canal is unable to accommodate some of the most modern naval vessels and the volume of traffic soon may be greater than it can handle.

5. Renegotiation by the United States and Panama of the present Panama Canal Treaty on a basis that respects Panama's legitimate interests and the security of the Canal.

6. Use of solar and nuclear energy for projects for the desalinization of sea water. Such a program might include the establishment of processing plants in Peru, Chile, Haiti and Northern Brazil.

7. The development of regional Inter-American educational institutions. These institutions can provide the academic, scientific and technical education necessary to meet the challenge of the new sciences and modern technology and also help to develop the political and community leadership essential for the functioning of a democratic society.

8. And lastly, an Inter-American Defense Conference should be convened to lay plans for dealing with the Soviet communist occupation of Cuba and communist subversion and sabotage throughout the hemisphere. The reactivated Inter-American Defense Council should have an important role in the implementation of these plans.

(more)

Pan American Press Seminar

April 21, 1964

IV. Conclusion

I think we must face frankly the fact that the tasks before us
are not easy.

For the world is not so simple as it was in the days of our
forefathers or Simon Bolivar. The accretion of history and its
legacy of hope frustrated, the collapse of geography, and the myriad
complexity of a hemisphere economy that ranges from the uncomplicated
pastoral life in the Andean foothills to the transistorized computers
of Sao Paulo add gigantic dimensions to our problems.

But the force that moves men is the power of ideas.

The democratic ideal is the most powerful moving force in the
world because it represents man at his best today. It is our
heritage. There are those who have appropriated its symbolism,
subverted its meaning and debased its purpose.

The fault, however, is too much ours, for our failures to make
a reality of the beliefs we have professed.

We have vacillated too long and hesitated too much.

This Western Hemisphere -- this New World -- has been, and is,
a symbol of man's hope -- hope that democracy, individual oppor-
tunity and human dignity will triumph here.

Free men and free nations of the Americas must unite in their
common interest to assure their mutual security and to further
their individual and common well-being.

It is not too late.

Democracy can and must triumph here. The future of man demands
it.