principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter. Thus, the signatory parties condemn war and agree not to resort to the use or threat of force in any manner inconsistent with the Charter or the treaty. They likewise undertake to submit every controversy which may arise between them to methods of peaceful settlement and to endeavor to settle such disputes by the use of existing inter-American peace machinery before referring them to the United Nations. This latter principle is in complete harmony with the Charter, which encourages member states to settle their disputes by means of their own choice.

OBLIGATIONS IN THE EVENT OF AN ARMED ATTACK

In the Act of Chapultepec there was no distinction in the obligations assumed with respect to various types of aggression. However, the Charter of the United Nations in dealing with regional security arrangements draws a clear distinction between an "armed attack" and other acts or threats of aggression. The framers of the present treaty decided, therefore, that the best way both to assure consistency with the Charter and to take full advantage of the freedom of action under the right of self-defense as recognized therein was to follow the pattern set up by the Charter.

A principal feature of the treaty, therefore, is the twofold obligation laid upon the parties in the event of an armed attack. First, each one of the parties is obligated "to assist in meeting the attack" (art. 3, par. 1). By this language the right of individual or collective selfdefense recognized in article 51 of the United Nations Charter is converted into an obligation. The provision contemplates that the parties will begin to carry out their obligation to assist individually or collectively prior to consultation, and in the case of a sudden attack, this element of time might prove decisive. This is an essential point of the treaty.

In such a case it was recognized as impractical to seek to determine in advance in the treaty itself the nature, timing, and exact extent of the immediate assistance to be given. This decision is accordingly left to each of the parties under the terms of article 3.

The second obligation in the event of an armed attack is to consult without delay in order to examine the immediate measures of assistance already taken and to decide upon the measures of a collective character that should be put into effect. It is specifically provided in the treaty, as it is in the United Nations Charter, that both the individual and the collective measures may continue "until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security."

HEMISPHERE DEFENSE AREA

Article 3, paragraph 3, of the treaty provides that the two obligations discussed in the preceding section of this report come into effect "in case of any armed attack which takes place within the region described in Article 4 or within the territory of an American state.

When the attack takes place outside of the said areas, the provisions of Article 6 shall be applied." This region, which is described in technical terms in article 4, is shown graphically on the accompanying map. It embraces both North and South America, including Canada and Alaska, together with Greenland, the Arctic and Antarctic regions of the continent, and all of the area lying between.

As brought out in the hearings before the committee, the effect of this definition of the region upon the two obligations discussed above may be summarized as follows:

1. The obligations are operative if an armed attack takes place against "the territory of an American State" wherever that territory is located. This includes, therefore, not only the territory of the continental United States and all other American states on the continent, but also the islands of Hawaii, Guam, and any other possessions of this country abroad, since they all constitute a part of "the territory of an American State."

2. The obligations are likewise operative if an armed attack is directed against an American state and takes place within the region described. In such case it need not be against the territory of an American state but could take place anywhere within the region and might, for example, be against the land, sea, or air forces of such American state.

3. The term "American State" includes Canada.

4. If the attack is not directed against territory within the defense area or the territory of an American state outside the area, then the obligation of article 6 applies. As discussed below, this is an obligation to consult in order to agree upon the collective or individual measures which "must be taken to assist the victim of the aggression."

The committee wants to emphasize the fact that the delineation of such an area in the treaty in no sense constitutes an attempt to define the Western Hemisphere. It simply serves to define the geographic area, in addition to the territories of the American states, within which an armed attack will bring into operation the individual obligation to extend immediate assistance to the state attacked. OBLIGATIONS IN THE EVENT OF OTHER SITUATIONS WHICH MAY ENDANGER PEACE IN THE AMERICAS

Article 6 sets forth the additional situations, other than an armed attack, which may endanger peace and provides for the steps to be taken in order to deal with them. This article applies whenever the inviolability or integrity of the territory, the sovereignty, or the political independence of any American state is affected by—(1) an

[The following official map is reproduced here
instead of the unofficial one appearing at this
place in the Report.]

415900-57- -55

act of aggression other than an armed attack; (2) an extracontinental or intracontinental conflict; or (3) any other fact or situation [that] might endanger the peace of America.

Under the article, the occurrence of these events brings into operation similar but differently worded obligations. In case aggression is committed, the parties shall meet in consultation

in order to agree on the measures which must be taken victim of the aggression.

to assist the

In the case of an extracontinental conflict or of other situations that
might endanger continental peace, the parties shall meet in consul-
tation-

in order to agree on
... the measures which should be taken for the common
defense and for the maintenance of the peace and security of the continent.

Unlike article 3, which sets forth obligations in the event of an armed attack, this article does not provide for immediate assistance in advance of consultation. The obligation is rather one to consult in order to agree upon appropriate collective measures. It is assumed that the situations contemplated under this article will not be of such urgency as to require immediate individual action on the part of the contracting states.

TYPES OF ENFORCEMENT MEASURES CONTEMPLATED

As has been pointed out above, in the event of an armed attack or an act of aggression the organ of consultation provided for in the treaty is to agree upon those measures of a collective character that should be adopted to assist the attacked state and to penalize the aggressor. The various political, economic, and military measures contemplated are specifically outlined in article 8. That article reads:

For the purposes of this Treaty, the measures on which the Organ of Consultation may agree will comprise one or more of the following: Recall of chiefs of diplomatic missions; breaking of diplomatic relations; breaking of consular relations; partial or complete interruption of economic relations, or of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and radio-telephonic or radio-telegraphic communications; and use of armed force.

This enumeration in general follows the Act of Chapultepec and article 41 of the United Nations Charter. It will be noted that the treaty provides that the measures which may be agreed upon "will comprise one or more of the following." The language is thus mandatory rather than permissive, and presumably the organ of consultation, in deciding upon the enforcement action to be taken, must select one or more of the specific measures listed in article 8.

It will be noted, too, that economic relations, or rail, sea, air, postal, and other communications with the aggressor state, may be either partly or completely interrupted. This permits a great deal of flexibility in the severity of the measures which may be agreed upon by the organ of consultation.

Still a different type of action is contemplated in article 7 in case of a conflict between two American states. In such an event the con

H

tracting parties will call upon the contending states to cease hostilities and restore matters to the status quo ante bellum. All other measures will be taken which are necessary to reestablish or maintain peace or to settle the conflict by peaceful means. If these efforts to restore peace fail, however, collective enforcement action may be promptly taken.

MACHINERY OF CONSULTATION UNDER THE TREATY The treaty provides for both a provisional and a regular mechanism through which consultations will take place and decisions be reached. The normal organ of consultation will be the ministers of foreign affairs of the states which have ratified the treaty. The provisional organ may be the Governing Board of the Pan American Union until the meeting of the foreign ministers can take place. These two bodies are established instruments of action in the inter-American system, and the designation of the Board to act provisionally should facilitate prompt action under the treaty in the event of an emergency.

VOTING PROVISIONS

One of the most significant aspects of the treaty is the provision regarding voting and the binding effect of decisions. All initial procedural and administrative decisions under the treaty are to be taken by an absolute majority of the states qualified to vote (art. 16). However, once the organ of consultation is convoked to consider a particular situation, all decisions are to be taken by a vote of two-thirds of the ratifying states (art. 17).

The

The requirement of two-thirds reflects the view of the overwhelming majority of the American Republics as expressed in consultations carried out prior to the Rio Conference and represents a middle ground between a requirement of unanimity and a simple majority. decision was reached on the ground that a two-thirds majority is sufficiently high to assure that action taken will reflect the general collective will of the American community and can thus be made effective, yet it avoids the possibility of paralyzing the operation of the treaty through the nonconcurrence of a small minority.

The parties obligate themselves to comply with such decisions reached by a two-thirds majority to put into effect the punitive measures enumerated in article 8, except that no state is required to use armed force without its consent.

This means that when two-thirds of the voting states decide that political or economic sanctions should be employed, each of the parties is bound by the decision, although it may have voted against it. Moreover, the exception that no state shall be required to use armed force without its consent does not prevent the other states from employing military force in a given case if they so desire.

Thus no veto operates within the inter-American security system. The committee agreed that this procedure represents a significant advance over the voting methods presently used in the United Nations and constitutes an important precedent for the future.