Uruguay Uruguay has promised to send foodstuffs and medicines to Vietnam. Venezuela Venezuela has agreed to provide 500 tons of rice for refugee relief. (The following information was obtained from the Department of Defense.) FREE WORLD ASSISTANCE FOR VIETNAM There are presently 38 nations, not including the United States and France, contributing or having promised assistance to South Vietnam. Assistance from 31 countries is in place; assistance from 7 other countries has been promised. The following is a list of assistance in place except as otherwise noted: China... 160 Costa Rica. Dominican Republic. Greece. Guatemala.. Honduras. India... Iran. Ireland. Italy. Japan.. Korea.. Laos 80-man agricultural team, 18-man psywar team, electrical To come: Medical assistance. To come: Medical assistance. Professors, physicians, forestry expert, technical advisors, Medical supplies. [Deleted.] Cloth for flood relief. To come: Tea and sugar factory 1,000 is tons of petroleum, oil, and lubricants, medical team. Pharmaceutical supplies. Luxembourg. Malaysia.. Nicaragua. Pakistan. Philippines. Clothing and $10,000 in cash for flood relief. Medical teams and psywar team. [Deleted]. Spain. Medical team, 800 pounds of medicines, blankets. Switzerland. 30 microscopes. Thailand. Turkey [Deleted] cement. Medical supplies. To come: Cement. United Kingdom.. Police instructors, professor, technical equipment, $140,000 Uruguay. To come: Medical supplies. Venezuela.. 500 tons of rice. NOTE. The French, though their policies in South Vietnam differ from ours, continue to have some 600 educators, medical and technical personnel there. In addition to the above, negotiations are underway between the Government of Vietnam and most of the nations having already provided assistance for increased contributions. Administration: FWA forces are jointly administered by the International Military Assistance Force Office in Saigon, which has representation from every country having FWA personnel in Republic of Vietnam. A CINCPAC policy and procedures manual has been prepared for use in negotiations and administration of FWA forces. The Department of State coordinates the U.S. Interagency FWA effort; OSD/ISA/FER is the DOD point of contact. Prepared by: OASD/ISA/FER, Jan. 15, 1966. Secretary RUSK. You know we have 20,000 Koreans engaged in combat there. We have the Australian-New Zealand combat team which is in combat there. There are other forces involved in various aspects of it. The bulk of it continues to be carried by the South Vietnamese. Yes; we are disappointed that more forces from more countries are not present on the scene. AID PROVIDED BY INDIA Senator MUNDT. Let me ask you one or two specific questions in that area. Is India included in that group of 32 nations? Secretary RUSK. She has made some contribution but it is a relatively-India has provided cloth for flood relief. Under study is the preparation of facilities for tea and sugar, and she has considered sending equipment for the blood transfusion center. Senator MUNDT. Some cloth and some blood. That is the limit? MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO INDIA IN 1962 Senator MUNDT. Let me ask you what happened back in 1962 when India had some pretty rough going, as I recall, with the Red Chinese when they were attacking her borders. At that time we provided some direct military assistance, did we not? Secretary RUSK. Yes; we and Britain joined to provide certain assistance to India at that time. Senator MUNDT. Nehru was then the leader, was he not? Senator MUNDT. Did Nehru ask the United States, through an appeal to President Kennedy at that time, for air protection? sir. Secretary RUSK. There was some discussion of that at that time, Senator MUNDT. That is very evasive, Mr. Secretary. Secretary RUSK. I beg your pardon? Senator MUNDT. That was evasive. Either Nehru asked for air assistance or he did not. Secretary RUSK. Senator, we are in open session. I could go into closed session. It is not proper for me to go into communications with chiefs of government on matters of that sort in open session. Senator MUNDT. Well, let me put it this way: Did the United States provide some air protection for India at that time? Secretary RUSK. We provided some transport aircraft, as I recall. I would have to refresh my memory on whether there was more air support than that at that point. We also assisted in certain air defense measures, such as radar, things of that kind. Senator MUNDT. There are some things that have to be off the record but I cannot expect you to present in detail or remember in detail, but will you search your memory and the record and put in the record at this time whether we did provide some protection and aircraft carriers and planes at that time? Secretary RUSK. I will, sir. (The information referred to follows:) U.S. MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO INDIA DURING 1962 BORDER INCIDENTS WITH COMMUNIST CHINA The United States provided U.S. Air Force transport aircraft for a short time to help India move troops and supplies, and in addition provided directly some military equipment to the Indian Government. The United States did not provide air protection, i.e., combat aircraft, but discussed air defense arrangements. In 1963, an air defense agreement with India was signed under which, later that year, planes and personnel from the Royal Air Force, the U.S. Air Force, and the Indian Air Force conducted an air defense exercise in India at the request of the Indian Government. Senator MUNDT. Second, it is correct, is it not, that we would not have provided that kind of protection at that time without being asked by somebody in India for some assistance? We did not go around looking for a chance to spread ourselves into new areas of dissention, I hope? Secretary RUSK. Whatever we did was with the full consent and with the-in accordance with the wishes of the Indian Government; yes, sir. Senator MUNDT. Well, I would kind of like to relate that to this discussion we are having about North Vietnam. I understand we are not just going out voluntarily pushing our way into Vietnam. We are doing that in response to a request from the Saigon government. Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir. Senator MUNDT. And I would like to think that we are not in this situation in a different posture than we were in India from the standpoint of the initiation of the support. I like to think whatever we are doing is consistent with the American policy, and I am a little disappointed that you give the impression that we have to push ourselves into any kind of conflict without being asked, and if we did it in India, we maybe did it here. Secretary RUSK. No; I did not in any way intend to leave that impression. Throughout the course of the morning I have pointed out Senator MUNDT. You left that with me in response to that last answer. Secretary RUSK. Yes. We do not go about looking for business in this matter. We have specific commitments, and we follow as best we can the national interests when particular situations arise. I just did not want to get into communications among chiefs of government in an open hearing. That was the only reluctance I had, Senator. Senator MUNDT. Without going into the details of the specific communication Secretary RUSK. India asked us. Senator MUNDT. I am a little disenchanted with all this kind of superduper secrecy about a peacetime operation. I begin to realize why we do not get any better responses from our supposed friends, why we do not get better books and occasionally go around and say, "Look, we recall in November 1962 that Mr. Nehru asked the President of the United States for air protection and we gave it." Those are the facts. And those being the facts, and those facts becoming known in India, it has to follow there is a better chance to get the great populous country of India to provide manpower and support and even men, which, as you know, has been advocated by some speakers in the Indian Parliament. If the Indian people know that is the fact, that is going to help us. If you shroud it in all this secrecy in every instance when we responded to a request, no wonder we cannot induce the people of India and France and Britain to feel they have an obligation now as a quid pro quo to do something to assist us, because we are doing this, I am convinced, for no selfish purpose as far as the United States is concerned. This is in the interest of world peace. But I think we should have it a little clearer in the record if we are ever going to get off of dead center, you must be as concerned as I am, and that this committee is, and the country is, to get from other countries more support in a great contest which, if it goes wrong, could be of more immediate danger to India than to us. So they might feel they have an obligation to do something beside contribute blood to a blood bank and a little cloth. Whatever our problems are, Mr. Secretary, in South Vietnam, they are not because of an absence of cloth or a shortage of cloth. That is not of very direct aid to winning the victory. Secretary RUSK. Well, our effort on this is primarily working with governments in the ways in which governments usually work together. We have not attempted to take this up with a country like India through the media of public opinion. We would like to have more assistance in South Vietnam from more countries and a great many different types of assistance. Senator MUNDT. To get that, don't we have to create a public opinion in those countries in support of our proposal? Secretary RUSK. I think our proper procedure from the point of view of the Government is to take this matter up with other govern ments. Senator MUNDT. I yield. CONTRIBUTION OF TROOPS BY AUSTRALIA The CHAIRMAN. Just in that connection, last fall I made a very mild remark that the Australians might consider a little larger contribution, and the very next day--I do not know whether it was yousomeone in the administration, sent Prime Minister Menzies a congratulatory telegram of reassurance of how much we appreciated their wonderful contribution. It did not evidence to me any great concern about trying to get any more help. I thought I was trying to help you get a little bit more, but they took exactly the opposite view up here in Washington. Do you remember that, Mr. Secretary? Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir; I do. I think your remark was interpreted in Australia as minimizing and deprecating what they were doing. Senator GORE. That is what he intended. The CHAIRMAN. I thought it was very little; 1,300 men, I believe they have. This is a very prosperous country, close to the southeast Asia area. If anybody would be interested in helping, I would think it would be the Australians for their own self-interests aside from this overall problem of freedom, protection of freedom. I have great admiration for the Australians. But I do think that they are not making a very burdensome contribution with only 1,300 men. They challenged me. They said this was just as much relative to population as we were making. My arithmetic did not seem to work out that way, and there was a little difference in view about that. That is all I wanted to say. I did not think we were exerting ourselves much to increase our contribution. I am sorry, go ahead, Senator. NEED FOR GREATER FREE WORLD PARTICIPATION Senator MUNDT. You have the same problem in India and in France and in West Germany and in Japan and in Great Britain, Mr. Secretary, that you have here. Whenever there is uncertainty on the part of our populace or Members of the Senate or the House as to the reasons why we are doing something, there is a tendency to hold back. There is a lot of consultation by petition, by resolution and by statements now because there is a developing uncertainty in this country among the people as to what this is all about. Well, now, one, I think we have got to get a clear-cut understanding from the people for a long time we had pretty well in this countrywhich is getting confused because the leadership of the country is becoming more vague in its approach to these things. But I do not see how, unless we can help bring the world into this thing, the people of the world, in free, democratic countries like India and Britain and France, West Germany and Japan, they have got a stake in this, so that they can begin to realize that when they come to us and ask for legitimate assistance and it is provided, there is nothing wrong in the world for their leaders to provide a little assistance on our behalf. But you say if we won't let the people in the country knowyou said we should talk to the leaders. Secretary RUSK. I beg your pardon, Senator. Our role here in the executive branch of the Government is in dealing with the heads. of other countries. I hope all of these countries will listen to what you said today and think about it. But if I were to pursue this line of discussion with respect to individual countries, I would get in the way of what you and I would hope to accomplish in this direction. We cannot do this, I cannot do this, now in open session. You can, but I cannot. Senator MUNDT. Let me give you an illustration. I have here a page from the record of the Indian Parliament where one of the Indian parliamentarians was making what I felt was a real fine, courageous plea for support of his Government for us. He said: I wondered why such a big country as ours, India, cannot afford to set aside and maintain at our cost, say, a brigade of Indian troops for the United Nations peacekeeping force ready to go anywhere in the world, even to Vietnam, if necessary? What happens? The Government of India denies that they ever asked any help from the United States and ever got it. Now, the facts are clear. But the people, because we failed to present the facts, are going to believe their statesmen even though it was based upon misinformation. I do not think maybe this fellow intended to misrepresent it, but it was based upon misinformation. But whether he lied deliberately or made a misstatement because he did not research the record, the effect is the same if it goes unchallenged. Secretary RUSK. Some months ago the President of India proposed that there be organized a peacekeeping force among Afro-Asian countries, perhaps under the U.N. auspices, to keep the peace in the south Asian situation. |