UN Secretariat Item Scan - Barcode - Record Title Page 38 Date 08/06/2006 Time 11:11:51 AM
S-0864-0006-04-00001
Expanded Number S-0864-0006-04-00001
Title |tems-in-Public relations files - luncheons, dinners and receptions - Volumes XV, XVI, XVII
Date Created 03/03/1970
Record Type Archival Item
Container s-0864-0006: Public Relations Files of the Secretary-General: U Thant
Print Name of Person Submit Image Signature of Person Submit P" s Columbia University in the City of New York | New York, N. Y. 10027
SCHOOL OF LAW 435 West 116th street
June 2, 1970
His Excellency, U Thant Se cret ary- Ge ner al United Nations New York, N.Y. 10017
Dear Mr. Secretary- General: Thank you so much for your kind note of May 21, and particularly for your gracious words of thanks about my assistance on your statement to the conference of the Institute on Man and Science. I was more than happy to be of some small assistance in this connection. Actually, it is we. who must thank you for your generosity in addressing the conference once again this year. It meant ever so much to all of us. With warm personal regards,
Sincerely, 2jL_ 4 Richard N. Gardner Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization
RNG/ls CTO/nt
1970
I wish to thaidt y I am also most ^a-feeful to yoo. for yo«r assistance ia ttee ja-e^aratioii ciaf xny 3tatemeat toefore the opening meeting of the Ittstifeite 0ia Jto aad SeieSce With 0 ffcaut ji. I,.... ifeses 'J*e»$ea? of West ec - Mr. Uarasimhan Mr. Lemieux I. UNITED NATIONS Press Services Office of Public Information United Nations, N.Y. (FOR USE OF INFORMATION MEDIA — NOT AN OFFICIAL RECORD) Press Release 21 May 197° ON /POLITICS OF DLSARAMENT^ .OM...22 _MAY The Secretary-General, U Thant, vill address the opening meeting of a conference on "The Politics of Disarmament— Proposals for the 3-970s", sponsored "by the Institute on Man .and. Science of Rensselaerville, New York, tomorrow morning, 22 May at United Nations Headquarters . There will also be introductory statements by Lord Chalfont, Permanent United Kingdom Representative to the Council of the Western European Union, with responsibility for disarmament; Lev Isaakovich Mendelevich, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Soviet Union to the United Nations; Joao Augusto de Araujo Castro, Permanent Representative of Brazil to the United Nations; Jacques Kosciusko-Morizet, Permanent Representative of France to the United Nations; Joseph S. Clark, President, United World Federalists; and Sule Kolo, Nigerian representative to the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament, Geneva., The Chairman will be Philip C. Jessup, former Judge of the International Court of Justice. He will be introduced by C.V. Narasimhan, Chef de Cabinet and Deputy Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme, who presided over the previous three conferences on problems facing the United Nations, sponsored annually by the Institute. Professor Richard N, Gardner, of Columbia Law School and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, will act as Rapporteur. The 36 participants, who will attend in their private capacity, include United Nations ambassadors and officials, educators and scientists, with extensive knowledge and experience in the problems of disarmament, (more) 4- V - 2 - Press.-Release SG/1746 21 May 1970 Among -those attending the session will be: Dr. Harrison Brown of California Institute of Technology; lord Caradon, Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the United Nations; Earl W. Foell of the Los^ Angeles Times; Morton Halperin of the Brookings Institution; Edvard Hacforo, Permanent Representative of Norway to the United Nations; T.T.B. Koh, Peimanent Representative of Singapore to the United Nations; Vernon Johnson Mwaanga, Permanent Representative of Zambia to the United Nations; Christopher H0 Phillips, Deputy Permanent Representative of the United States on the Security Council; Andrew Pierre of the Council of Foreign Relations; Samar Sen, Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations; Agha Shahi, Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations; *. Piero Vinci, Permanent Representative of Italy to the United Nations; and Uli Vorontsov of the Embassy of the USSR. An informal exchange of ideas will deal with such key questions as (l) strategic arms control and disarmament; (2) European security and arms control; (3) conventional arms control in the "third world"; (4) United Nations and othei* disarmament initiatives„ . The Institute is a non-profit educational organization which has sponsored many conferences on vital world issues. Its President is Everett R. Clinchy. Conference meetings will continue over the week—end at the Institute's rural campus in Hensselaervills, Albany County, New York. * 5 May 1970 Professor Gardner of The Institute on Man and Science - phone 280-26^2 - called regarding the following arrangements for the Conference at the UN on 22 May. - 1. A conference room to be reserved between 10 am and 12 noon on 22 May - to accommodate ho people. 2. The press were not invited to the Conference last year but they would like to allow press this year. 3. The Secretary-General to address Conference on morning of 22 May. The Secretary-General to give a reception for members of the Conference at 12 noon on 22 May. A private dining room to be reserved for luncheon in DDR - approximately 30 to 35 people but exact number oould be given the day before. nt I informed Mr. Gardner that Conference Room 8 was reserved for meeting - and private dining room reserved for luncheon. £6- <&f-ted^ Mr. Gardner will forward a guest list for SG1s reception - approximately 35 people. nt cc - Mr. Lemieux V?" •*• CVN/CC cc: Professor Gardner Miss Rodney / Mrs. Mira / 20 Bear j(ou tap 3?owr kind letter i&vitisg me to the cpj£f Cf.V, Cabinet Everett R. on Science selaerville 121J*? THE INSTITUTE ON MAN AND SCIENCE/RENSSELAERVILLE, NEW YORK 12147/(518) 797-3477 The Honorable C. V. Narasimhan Chef de Cabinet United Nations New York, New York 10017 My dear C. V., !Under the chairmanship of Judge Philip C. Jessup, The Institute on Man and Science will convene a conference May 22 - 24 on "The Politics of Disarmament — Proposals for the 1970"s". The conference is one of a continuing series conducted by The Institute in cooperation with the United Nations on topics of concern to the world organization. The conference this year will emphasize the political implications of current and prospective efforts at arms control and disarmament. We propose to examine the implications of the SALT negotiations for Soviet-American relations, for Europe, and for the Third World — and also to examine how the United Nations and countries other than the super-powers can play a useful role in arms control. In addition, we intend to examine possibilities for nuclear non-proliferation, European security arrangements, and regional arms limitation in other areas. United Nations Secretary-General U Thant will address the opening session of the conference at UN Headquarters the morning of Friday May 22, and will be host at an ^nformal reception after the opening meeting. Members of the conference will lunch t the UN, and will then be transported to Rensselaerville by car for sessions ending at noon Sunday May 24. Rensselaerville is a three-hour drive from the UN, and about a fifty minute drive from Albany. The Institute will, of course, provide hospitality at Rensselaerville, and will pay expenses of your trip to New York and your trip home from Rensselaerville. In addition to Judge Jessup as chairman, we have asked Professor Richard N, Gardner of Columbia University's Law School, to be conference rapporteur. An outline he is preparing will serve as a basis for discussion. As in previous years, planning for the 1970 conference is going forward under the guidance of a special committee which includes UN Secretary-General U Thant; C. V. Narasimhan, Chef de Cabinet; Lord Caradon, Ambassador of the United Kingdom to the UN; Edvard Hambro, Norwegian Ambas- sador to the UN; and Chief Simeon Adebo, Executive Director of the UN Institute for Training and Research. I hope very much that you can participate in the seminar. I know your contribution could be of very great value to us, and I believe the exchange between diplomats, scientists and scholars will prove useful to all who attend. THE INSTITUTE IN RENSSELAERVILLE IS CHARTERED BY THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK •* * The tJbnorable C. V. Narasimhan Page 2 Please let me know at your earliest convenience whether you can accept our invitation. I am enclosing a list of the other invitees, and a report of one of our earlier conferences. If you accept the invitation, more details will follow. Sincerely, Everett R. Clinchy President ERCrhb Enclosures February 5, 1970 38** •(/faro* THE INSTITUTE ON MAN AND SCIENCE / RENSSELAERVILLE, NEW YORK PROGRAM OFFICE 325 EAST 41ST STREET, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017/(212) 687-3650 Memo to Participants: The Politics Of Disarmament — Proposals For The 1970's The enclosed materials are sent to you for background reading in connection with the Seminar at the UN and in Rensselaerville, New York May 22 - 24, 1970 when Judge Philip Jessup will preside, Professor Richard N. Gardner will serve as Rapporteur, and Secretary General U Thant will give the Keynote. Everett R. Clinchy The Institute On Man And Science May 13, 1970 THE INSTITUTE IN RENSSELAERVILLE IS CHARTERED BY THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK an Art.dA t• , e (fro m \j SCIENTIFIC JANUARY, 1970 VOL. 222, NO. SCIENTIFIC Established 1845 AMERICAN Volume 222 Number 1 The Dmitation of Strategic Arms The long-term prospects for the strategic-arms-limitation talks would be greatly enhanced by an early agreement to ban further tests of multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles (MIRV's) by G. W. Rathjens and G. B. Kistiakowsky Ihe preliminary phase of the strate- jectives strategic forces serve, what rela- ular realization—at least in the U.S. and gic-arms-limitation talks. ("SALT") tive roles offensive and defensive stra- presumably also in the U.S.S.R.—that Tibetween the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. tegic forces play and what the desired each side already has an enormous "over- was conducted in a convivial atmosphere effects of limitations on such forces are. kill" capacity with respect to the other, and with a refreshing lack of familiar If it should develop that there is no and that further escalation in strategic- rhetoric. The road ahead for the negotia- agreement on these points, it may not force levels would entail tremendous tions nonetheless remains a steep and be possible to negotiate any meaningful costs and new dangers at a time when slippery one. The fact that the talks were limitation on strategic forces. both countries are confronted with a delayed for as long as they were by both This article is written in the hope that host of other pressing demands on their sides is not an encouraging sign. The by stimulating discussion of these ques- resources. initial unwillingness of the Russian lead- tions the differences between the two Although these developments would ership to negotiate because of the Ameri- powers may become more clearly under- seem to favor successful negotiations, cai;aun involvement in Vietnam and the sub- stood and in time narrowed. Even if the they are possibly outweighed by devel- ;uent unwillingness of the American talks fail to produce significant agree- opments on the other side of the ledger. ^^rcaleadershic p to negotiate because of the ment, a better grasp of the issues in- The most troublesome items are two Russian intervention in Czechoslovakia volved will be in the ultimate interest of emerging technical capabilities: multiple both reflect a failure to perceive the ex- everyone. independently targeted reentry vehi- traordinary and possibly fleeting nature cles (MIRV's) and anti-ballistic-missile of the opportunity presented at this par- A number of recent developments (ABM) defenses. It is frequently argued ticular juncture in the anus race and a ^*- make the prospects for successful that the development and deployment failure to recognize that the strategic- negotiations seem to be more favorable of either (or particularly both) of these arms confrontation can and should be now than they might have been some systems by one superpower could lead largely decoupled from other sources of years ago. Advances in the strategic re- to a situation in which a decision to at- conflict between the two superpowers. connaissance capabilities of the super- tempt a preemptive attack against the More recent delays, first by the U.S. and powers (chiefly in the area of surveil- other's strategic forces might be consid- then by the U.S.S.R., reinforce the view lance by artificial satellites) are steadily ered rational. Indeed, some strategic that on both sides there has been a fun- reducing the need for intrusive inspec- planners contend that the threat is so damental failure in the ordering of pri- tion to establish the degree of compli- great that offsetting actions must be orities—a failure to recognize that the ance with possible future agreements. started even before it is clear whether or dangers to national security associated Thus the thorny issue of verification may not the adversary intends to acquire ei- with arms-control agreements can be far be less of a barrier to agreed arms limi- ther a MIRV or an ABM capability. It is less than those inherent in the ongoing tation than it has been in the past. In ad- our belief that such arguments are large- arms race. dition the rapid growth of Russian offen- ly fallacious and are made without real As the substantive phase of the arms sive-missile forces has effectively erased appreciation of the fact that a thermo- talks is about to begin, it is still not ob- a disparity with the U.S. that existed in nuclear war between the superpowers, vious that policy-making circles of the the past, thereby making an arms-limi- considering the vulnerability of the two two superpowers have consonant views tation agreement a more realistic possi- societies, is a totally irrational policy about such basic questions as what ob- bility. Finally, there is the growing pop- choice. No combination of tactics and 19 '.000 weapons, ofiensive and defensive, could provide either power with sufficient as- surance that at least a small fraction of 10,264 its adversary's weapons would not be -40 successfully delivered, thus inflicting in retaliation damage that would be clearly VGOO unacceptable. We are confronted here, however, with a paradox that will haunt the rest of this discussion. Unilateral decisions regarding the development and procure- 0.000 -35 ment of strategic-weapons systems, and hence planning for arms-control negotia- tions, have been and will continue to be greatly influenced by a fundamentally simpleminded, although often exceed- 3,000 ingly refined, form of military analysis. This approach, sometimes characterized -30 as "worst-case analysis," invariably as- m cribes to one's adversary not only capa- Q bilities that one would not count on for one's own forces but also imputes to him DC 7000 a willingness to take risks that would I seem insane if imputed to one's own po- y e> litical leadership. Thus the U.S. will LU — 25 6,295 react to Russian MIRV and ABM pro- c5c grams, and vice versa, whether or not national security demands it. Even if the o O O O reaction is totally irrational, it nonethe- CD < less becomes as much a part of reality as h- 4,050 LU if the decision were genuinely required 2,155 600 STRATEGIC BALANCE between the U.S. 2.000 and the U.S.S.R. is shown at left in terms of ^S the numbers of separately targetable stra- 1.054 1.645 tegic nuclear warheads already deployed 1.350 -5 and the numbers projected for 1975 if pres- ent plans to deploy multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles IMlRV's) go into 1.000 effect. The symbols indicate the means of de- livery; the numbers give the actual total of 656 deliverable warheads in each category. The scale at right suggests the enormous "over- 250 kill" capacity possessed by each side in ei- ther circumstance; it is calibrated in units 0 of 250—a highly conservative estimate of BEFORE AFTER BEFORE AFTER the number of nuclear warheads required to 1 MIRV MIRV i MIRV MIRV / devastate the 50 largest cities on each side. The chart includes only strategic (that is, in- tercontinental ) nuclear warheads, not tac- U.S. U.S.S.R. tical or intermediate-range nuclear weapons. arms race between the superpowers. the West would be increasingly attrac- any agreement under consideration. It Here there are essentially two problems. tive to the Russian leadership. But that is equally certain that the military will First, what was said earlier about the controversy, like the recent Russian dif- attempt (o influence him with similar unacceptability of nuclear war between ficulties in eastern Europe, is also likely arguments, both through its direct chan- the superpowers may be less applicable to be a factor in reinforcing the trend nels and through its Congressional allies. to conflicts between emerging nuclear toward orthodoxy and conservatism It is inconceivable that any meaning- powers, because their political leader- within the U.S.S.R., which is hardly a ful agreement can be reached if the ship will be less knowledgeable about favorable augury for an arms-control views of these groups should prevail. the effects of nuclear warfare and be- agreement. They need not, of course. Exercising cause the nuclear stockpiles involved Thus for SALT to be successful will broader judgment, the President can re- will, at least initially, not be large enough require not only that the two govern- ject such advice and, as suggested above, to ensure the destruction of entire so- ments be sincere in approaching the talks draw on very substantial nationwide cieties. Thus, with proliferation, the but also that they be prepared to display support for an agreement. Should he probability of thermonuclear war is like- leadership and steadfastness of purpose choose to do so, he will be in a better po- ly to increase, and the superpowers will in dealing with domestic opposition. On sition to make his decision politically have a real basis for concern about their both sides there will have to be a rejec- acceptable than would have been the becoming involved. Second, a phenome- tion of many of the premises on which case for any of his recent predecessors, non not unlike the much discussed ac- military policy has be<<"i a? least partially or for that matter for his opponent in the tion-reaction effects of ABM defenses based for two decades, for example the last election. There is almost certainly a and MIRV's is likely to come into play. importance of "superiority" in strategic sizable segment of the American body Nuclear proliferation may complicate strength, the concept of "winning" a politic that could accept a decision by Russian-American efforts to curtail the thermonuclear war, and the view that President Nixon to conclude a very far- strategic-arms race even more than the one can build meaningful defenses reaching agreement as a result of SALT jective facts warrant, as each super- against a thermonuclear attack. The that would not accept a similar position «wer overreacts not only to the devel- leadership in each nation will be con- were it offered by, say, a liberal Demo- opment of new centers of nuclear power fronted with arguments about the great cratic president. but also to the other's reaction to them. risks inherent in various kinds of agree- President Nixon's prospects for such In fact, the rising threat of nuclear ment—barely feasible (or at least not an achievement will be enhanced if the proliferation is already increasing the provably unfeasible) developments that SALT negotiators make substantial prog- pressure in the U.S. (and probably in the might be taken advantage of by an ad- ress in the next few months. With mo- U.S.S.R.) to develop defenses that might versary. Such arguments will undoubt- mentum established as a result of some be effective at least for a few years edly resemble those to which the Ken- limited agreement, and with the pros- against emergent nuclear powers. The nedy Administration had to respond, pects of broader agreements before enthusiasts talk about neutralizing com- when in connection with the nuclear- them, both the American and the Rus- pletely the effects of such developments; test-ban treaty it was asserted that the sian leadership might well make the the realists propose measures aimed at U.S.S.R. might conduct nuclear tests be- judgment that it would be worthwhile to reducing the damage that might be in- hind the moon or behind the sun to our expend the political capital that might be flicted in the unlikely event of a nuclear great disadvantage. If agreement is to be required to effect broader agreements. attack by a smaller power. Unfortunate- reached, such arguments will have to be If, on the other hand, the talks bog down ly the capabilities that might prove ef- judged for what they are: nightmares of in procedural discussions or in defense of fective, for instance an ABM system people who have focused so narrowly on obviously non-negotiable positions, the to cope with first-generation such problems that they simply lac-k the political leadership in both the U.S. and missiles, would probably loud perspective for weighing the risks of the U.S.S.R. will be in a weakened posi- the other superpower to expand or qual- agreement against the risks implicit in tion in dealing with those who are most itatively improve its strategic forces. continuing the arms race without any skeptical and fearful of an agreement. agreed constraints. Thus the importance of early limited HPhe other major considerations that In the case of the U.S. the President agreement in connection with SALT will have a bearing on the prospects will have a special problem and a formi- cannot be overestimated. for SALT are domestic. As the failure of dable challenge, perhaps the greatest American policy in Southeast Asia and faced by any American leader since Tn what areas might such limited agree- its implications become apparent, it President Wilson's effort at the end of ment be immediately feasible? In or- seems likely that there will be a sharp World War I to gain acceptance for his der to answer this question we must first reaction in an important segment of views regarding the Treaty of Versailles examine some of the technical realities of American society, with the polarization and the League of Nations. Although the present strategic balance. We believe of attitudes proceeding even further than most Americans, including probably a that for the foreseeable future techno- it has in the past year or two. It will be majority of those who supported Presi- logical considerations will continue to a difficult time for arms-control negotia- dent Nixon in his campaign for the make nuclear offensive forces dominant tions. Indeed, the strategic-anns-limita- Presidency, would support him in his over nuclear defensive forces. In other tion talks are likely to be a divisive factor efforts to reach an arms-control agree- words, we assert that, as has been the in the same way that the recent debate ment, almost certainly the conservative case since the initial deployment of on the Safeguard ABM system was. wing of the President's political sup- thermonuclear weapons, it will be easier The situation in the U.S.S.R., although porters will counsel him to exercise ex- to destroy a technologically advanced so- less clear-;-: seems no more promising. treme caution in approaching SALT. In ciety than to defend one. What can and The controversy between China and the so doing this latter group will give un- should be done both in structuring stra- U.S.S.R. might lead one to expect that warranted weight to the technical and tegic forces in the absence of agreement accommodation and cooperation with military risks that might be involved in and in agreeing to limitations is critically 21 dependent on whether or not this judg- ceptable destruction in the U.S. by a We believe this situation will not ment is correct. There is some dispute Russian attack—even by an attack change significantly in the near future. about its correctness in the U.S. For ex- launched in retaliation after the Russian Any realistic approach to limitations ample, some assert that with recent de- forces had already been preemptively on strategic armaments in the near fu- velopments in ABM technology it may struck. Such an American ABM system ture must almost certainly be in the be possible to offset the effects of an in- would in no way make our strategic context of the maintenance of very great cremental expenditure on offensive capa- forces more useful as political instru- assured-destruction capabilities. Agree- bilities by a similar or even lesser ex- ments, and hence no Russian response ments that would embody quite dillerent penditure on defenses. Nonetheless, we would really be required to preserve the strategic balances might result if any of share the prevailing view that defense of effectiveness of the U.S.S.R.'s assured- several changes were to occur: techno- population, at least against a determined destruction forces. Because of fear, con- logical breakthroughs that would lead to adversary with comparable resources, is servatism and uncertainty, however, it the dominance of the defense over the essentially hopeless. seems a foregone conclusion that a offense, the development of a high de- To facilitate discussion we shall now fully compensating buildup in Russian gree of trust between the U.S. and the define two terms that have come to be strength would follow. U.S.S.R., the willingness of both nations applied to strategic forces and to their There may, of course, be circum- to accept intrusive inspection, or an in- uses. By "damage limitation" we mean stances in which damage-limiting efforts creased appreciation that strategic forces the prevention of damage to industry will be effective. Each of the superpow- designed to inflict much lower damage and population in a nuclear war or the ers would temporarily be able to main- levels would also serve effectively as a reduction of such damage to below the tain a strategic posture that might great- deterrent. We do not see any of diese levels that might be expected without ly limit the damage to it in a conflict with changes as short-term possibilities. the use of certain damage-limiting mea- a lesser nuclear power such as China. Because the assured-destruction, or sures or systems. Antiaircraft or ABM This will be particularly true if a pre- damage-inflicting, capabilities of the two defenses of cities would be categorized emptive, or "counterforce," attack superpowers are so large and so varied, as being damage-limiting systems. The against the lesser power's strategic nu- the present strategic balance is remark- use of civil defense measures such as clear forces is not excluded. ably insensitive to either qualitative or population shelters or evacuation of Moreover, if a nuclear exchange be- quantitative changes in strategic forces. threatened cities would be regarded as tween the two superpowers should ever Even major changes in force levels, in- damage-limiting measures. So would be occur, parts of the strategic forces in cluding the neutralization of entire sys- attempts to limit the adversary's ability being at that time probably would be tems (for example all bomber aircraft), to inflict damage by preemptively at- used for active defense or in attacks on would not be likely to have major effects tacking any component of his offensive the strategic forces of the opponent. on the damage levels one would expect strategic forces. By "assured destruction" Thus they would be used in a damage- each of the superpowers to suffer in a we mean the destruction with high con- limiting role. Their effect would not be nuclear war. Worldwide radioactive fall- fidence of the adversary's society. Mea- great, however, simply because the over- out might be reduced significantly, but sures to achieve such destruction, or sys- kill capacity of each superpower's as- as far as the superpowers are concerned, tems that might be used for the purpose, sured-destruction capabilities is so enor- cross-targeting with other systems would would be characterized as assured-de- mous. Both superpowers almost certainly ensure that all major population and in- struction measures or systems. They in- now have the ability to destroy at least dustrial centers would continue to be in clude the use of offensive missiles and half of the adversary's population and jeopardy. When considered in the frame- bombers against civilian targets, as dis- three-quarters of his industrial capacity work of the virtually certain collapse of tinguished from strictly military targets. in spite of any damage-limiting measures an entire society, changes of a few per- With these definitions we recast our that might be undertaken by the other. cent in fatalities, which is all one might earlier statement about the relative roles This situation has come about as a result expect with foreseeable changes in stra- of offensive and defensive strategic of two factors. A strategic doctrine has tegic-force levels, are not likely to affect weapons to assert: In the superpower developed, at least in the U.S., that has political decisions. Although it may have confrontation any attempt to build sig- called for the maintenance of a very been correct some years ago to charac- nificant damage-limiting capabilities can great assured-destruction capability un- terize the balance of terror as a "deli- be offset btj changes in the adversary's der all conceivable circumstances. The cate" one, it is not so today, nor is it like- assured-destruction capabilities. To take doctrine has been one that could be ly to be so in the foreseeable future. a specific example, attempts to limit and easily implemented simply because ther- It will not be easily upset. Opponents reduce the damage to American society monuclear weapons and strategic deliv- of the Safeguard ABM decision have by deploying ABM defenses (including ery systems are cheap in terms of the argued widi some effect (although obvi- appropriate civil defense measures) can damage they can inflict on civilian targets. ously not with complete success) that the be offset by qualitative and quantitative This tremendous buildup of offensive U.S. deterrent was most unlikely to be in improvements in the adversary's offen- forces means that the effectiveness of the jeopardy at any time in the near future sive capabilities at a cost to him certainly last weapons used in destroying another simply because of its diversity and no greater than the cost of the damage- society (in fact, the effectiveness of some- because of the improbability of the limiting measures taken. What is more, thing like the last 90 percent of all weap- U.S.S.R.'s being able to develop damage- we believe that by and large such re- ons used) would be relatively small, since limiting capabilities and tactics that sponses will occur, in spite of the fact those already expended would have left would effectively neutralize all the deter- that realistic security considerations do so little to destroy. The amount of Me rent's components. not necessarily require a response. Even and property saved by damage-limiting a very large-scale and technically sophis- efforts would be dwarfed by the amount ~W7"e have argued so far that one gen- ticated American ABM system could not destroyed by weapons whose delivery eral premise on whose acceptance be counted on to prevent totally unac- could not be prevented. a successful SALT outcome depends is INLAND RELATIVE DESTRUCTIVENESS of several currently deployed perfectly uniform population distribution the lethal area times the thermonuclear weapons is illustrated here in relation to the damage population density gives the total number of people killed in the caused by the nuclear bomb that was exploded over Hiroshima on explosion. At present most of the strategic warheads deployed by May 8. 194,). The colored circles superposed on the map denote the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. are in the megaton range or larger. Even each weapon's "lethal area": the area within which the number of after MIRVing all the strategic warheads on both sides will exceed survivor.-, equals the number of fatalities outside the circle. For a the estimated 15-kiloton explosive yield of the Hiroshima bomb. lliat the offense will continue to domi- a much bigger "time window" during fectiveness of a large-scale Russian ABM nate the defense for the foreseeable fu- which performance will be acceptable. defense has provided the primary ra- ture. A second technical generalization The effectiveness of submarine-launched tionale for t!ie U.S. decision to introduce tliat may be equally important is: The missiles in destroying cities will not de- MIRV's into both land-based and sea- uncertainty about the effectiveness of pend much on the instant of launch. based missile forces, the net effect being damage-limiting capabilities will be con- Third, damage limitation generally will a severalfold increase in the number of siderably greater than about assured-de- involve the use of more intimately cou- warheads these forces will be able to struction capabilities. This statement can pled systems (for example the radars, deliver. Barring unforeseeable technical be supported by a number of arguments. computers and missiles of an ABM sys- developments, we must expect that the First, the characteristics of the target tem), inviting the possibility of "cata- great uncertainty that characteri7es the against which assured-destruction capa- strophic" technical failures. All these fac- performance of damage-limiting systems bilities would be used (population and tors tend to make the advance estimates will continue, and we must base our ap- industry) will be known with some pre- of the effectiveness of assured-destruc- proach to SALT on that assumption. cision and will change only slowly with tion systems far more reliable than esti- time. On the other hand, the character- mates of damage-limiting systems. Tf one accepts the judgments we have istics of the systems (and the environ- The inherent uncertainty in effective- made about the relative effectiveness ment) against which damage-limiting ness fhat chara;-"-.'zes the performance of defense and offense, about the insen- capabilities must operate (adversary's of damage-liiYiitKig systems has been of sitivity of assured-destruction capability warheads, delivery vehicles and launch profound importance in the Russian- to changes in force levels and about the facilities) will be generally less well American strategic-arms race. Each side uncertainty that characterizes damage- known and more susceptible to rapid has reacted to the development, or even limiting efforts, one is led to some pos- variation, both in quality and in num- the possible development, by the other sibly useful generalizations about the ber, at the option of the adversary. Sec- of damage-limiting capabilities by great- forthcoming substantive phase of SALT. ond, some of the damage-limiting sys- ly strengthening its offensive forces—to First, the level of damage that each tems (such as ABM defenses, antiaircraft the point of overreaction because of the of the superpowers can inflict on the defenses and under some circumstances conservative assumption that the adver- other is not likely to be altered signif- antisubmarine warfare, or ASW, sys- sary's damage-limiting forces will be far icantly in the near future. Measures that tems) must function at the time cho- more effective than they are in fact likely might possibly be agreed on could sen by the adversary for his offensive, to be, For example, the uncertainty change the level of damage that each whereas for assured destruction there is about the possible deployment and ef- side could inflict on the other by at most 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 NUMBER OF DELIVERED WARHEADS FUTILITY of seeking to mitigate the consequences of a full-scale livered. The solid curve indicates the immediate, easily calculable nuclear exchange between the two superpowers by negotiating fatalities; the shading represents the fact that the total fatalities modest reductions in strategic-force levels or by resorting to moder- would probably be much larger. In either case, because of the very ately effective "damage-limiting" measures is illustrated in this large number of deployed weapons, the effects of small changes in graph, in which the expected fatalities in the U.S.S.R. are plotted the total of delivered weapons would be negligible. The expected as a function of the number of U.S. megaton-range warheads de- effects of a Russian attack against the U.S. would be similar. a Few percent. Therefore the problem of siles (IRBM's) in Siberia, the measures the use of such MIRV's, it does not nec- the reduction in damage in the event of that could have long-term effectiveness essarily follow that the deployment of war should probably be given low pri- against a third country's nuclear strength the MIRV's would make such a strike ority us a short-term negotiation objec- would appear to the other superpower more likely. As we have noted, in the tive. More realistic objectives of the ne- to foreshadow an erosion in its own as- context of a confrontation between su- gotiations could be to lower the level of sured-destruction, or deterrent, capabil- perpowers such an attack would surely tension between the superpowers and ity. This creates an authentic problem be irrational, no matter how severe the so reduce the probability of nuclear war. of conflicting desires. We would hope crisis, simply because no responsible po- Second, apart from possible world- that in efforts to deal with this problem litical leader could ever have high con- wide fallout ettects and domestic polit- the usefulness of damage-limiting capa- fidence in the effectiveness of the attack ical considerations, neither side need be bilities with respect to the lesser nuclear and in the effectiveness of the other much concerned about the possibility of powers would not be overrated. Al- damage-limiting measures that would modest, or even substantial, expansions though such damage-limiting capabil- be required to keep the damage from a in the strategic offensive forces of the ities probably would be effective in retaliatory response down to acceptable other side, not about precise limitations reducing damage in the event that a levels. Although MIRV's are not likely on those forces, as long as the other side lesser power attempted a nuclear at- to have much actual effect on the will- does not have a damage-limiting capa- tack against one of -H superpowers, ingness or ability of nations to use stra- bility. Because of the large overkill ca- we question whether £. lief superpower tegic nuclear forces to attain political pacities discussed above, even large in- would ever be willing to take action objectives, we must accept the fact that creases in strategic forces will have little against a lesser power on the assumption arms policies will, to a substantial de- military effect. that damage-limiting efforts would be gree, be based on the assumption that Third, measures to constrain the in- 100 percent effective, that is, on the as- they might be so used. troduction or improvement of damage- sumption that "damage denial" with Beyond that, there is the problem of Hting systems, particularly those respect to a lesser power could be the impact of MIRV's on events if a mio.se performance is expected to be achieved. Considering one's inability to crisis should ever escalate to the point highly uncertain, merit high priority. have high confidence in the effectiveness where limited numbers of nuclear weap- The introduction or improvement of of damage-limiting measures, and con- ons will have been employed by the su- damage-limiting capabilities by either sidering the effects of even a single ther- perpowers against each other. At some side is likely to result, as we have noted, monuclear weapon on a large American point in the process of escalation it is in an excessive reaction by the other. Be- or Russian city, we doubt that efforts likely that one or both powers would cause of the insensitivity of the strategic to develop damage-limiting capabilities initiate counterforce attacks against the balance to modest changes in force lev- with respect to the smaller powers would other's remaining offensive forces. Such els, a move toward the development of materially increase the options the su- an attack would probably come earlier a narrowly circumscribed damage-limit- perpowers would have available for if one or both sides had counterforce- ing capability by one side could in prin- dealing with these powers. effective MIRV's than if neither did. ciple be tolerated without undue con- " With this background in mind one Because of what we regard as unwar- cern by the other. Such a move might would be" in a good position to evaluate ranted, but nevertheless real, concern be perceived, however, as an indicator the relative desirability of limiting var- about MIRV's being used in a pre- of the adversary's intent to develop an ious strategic systems if each were un- emptive counterforce attack, and be- across-the-board damage-limiting capa- ambiguously useful only for damage cause of more legitimate concern that J^ty. (Witness Secretary of Defense limitation or assure .1 destruction. Un- once a thermonuclear exchange has be- 0rd's public reaction to a possible fortunately many existing or prospective gun MIRV's may make further escala- Soviet SS-9 MIRV capability.) This, strategic systems may play several roles, tion more likely, MIRV development coupled with the fact that a develop- a factor that greatly complicates the may well have a critical impact on the ment of damage-limiting capabilities can problem. outcome of SALT, and for that matter be offset rather quickly and cheaply, vir- on the force levels of the two sides in- tually ensures a reaction. The overall ef- t~\{ all the ambiguous developments dependent of the talks. It is generally, fect of such an action-reaction cycle on ^now under way none is more trou- although not universally, accepted that the ability of each side to inflict damage blesome than MIRV. The development the tests of MIRV's have not yet gone on the other is likely to be small, but the of a MIRV capability may facilitate the far enough for one to have confidence expenditures of both sides on strategic maintenance of an assured-destruction that their reliability and accuracy would armaments are likely to be much in- capability by providing high assurance be sufficient to assure their effectiveness creased, as will be the tensions between that ABM defenses of industry and pop- in a counterforce role against hardened them. ulation can be penetrated. Given suffi- ICBM's. On the other hand, the MIRV Fourth, owing to the large uncertain- cient accuracy, reliability and yield, principle is now demonstrated, and the ty that characterizes the effectiveness of however, MIRV's may also make it pos- expectation is common that with per- damage-limiting systems and tactics, the sible for a small number of missiles to haps the second generation of such sys- two superpowers will face a very trou- destroy a larger number of fixed offen- tems, if not with the first, MIRV's will blesome dilemma if, on the one hand, sive facilities, even if they are "hard- be effective as counterforce weapons. they try to develop effective damage- ened" against the effects of nuclear If no constraints are put on the de- limiting capabilities with respect to weapons. velopment of MIRV's, it is likely that emerging nuclear powers and, on the Although the effectiveness of a given each superpower will go ahead with other, they attempt to limit the strategic- missile force in a damage-limiting pre- such development and (in the case of arms race between themselves. With a emptive attack against an adversary's the U.S. at least) an early deployment few exceptions, such as a deployment of intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program. This will be regarded as par- Russian intermediate-range ballistic mis- force might be much increased through ticularly urgent if ABM deployment continues, or even if there continues to fense with components specific-ally op- search and development, command and be evidence of significant research and timized for the defense of hardened control, communications and intelli- development that might later lead to ICBM's might be one response. There gence activities), outlays for strategic ABM deployment. Assuming that MIRV is likely to be even further reliance on systems could \\ ell double by the mid- programs do continue, each superpower mobile systems: missile-launching sub- 197()'s. Continuing large expenditures will perceive in the other's deployment marines, new strategic bombers and, in on strategic systems .ire probably also to a possible threat to its fixed-base ICBM's the case of the U.S.S.R., probably mo- be expected in the I'.S.S.R. and will react to counter that threat. bile ICBM's. It is conceivable that fixed The U.S. has already begun to do so ICBM's may be given up altogether, al- As we have stated, there appears to be in deciding to go ahead with an active though the arguments we have advanced 1•*• no basis for expecting SALT to lead ABM defense of Minuteman sites: the against the acceptability of attacking to significant reductions in the assured- Safeguard program. Acceleration in the them preemptively would still be valid. destruction capabilities of the super- U.S.S.R.'s missile-launching submarine It is also likely in the absence of powers. Therefore other objectives must program and a possible mobile-ICBM agreements that one or the other of the command our attention. The most im- program are plausible reactions to the superpowers will deploy ABM systems portant objective is of course to reduce U.S. MIRV programs. that will provide more extensive and ef- the probability that a thermonuclear ex- We anticipate that in the absence of fective defense -r population and indus- change will ever take place. agreements the technological race will try dian either the present Russian de- The major factors affecting that prob- go much further. It seems likely that the fenses around Moscow or the projected ability are likely not to be simply tech- arguments to "do something" about the Phase II of Safeguard. Defense against nical but to be largely political. They vulnerability of fixed ICBM's will in- a Chinese missile capability may be the involve the degree of tension that will crease in tempo and will carry the day rationale, but it is to be expected that exist between the superpowers based on in both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. Super- the other superpower will respond to international political considerations, on hardening alone will be perceived to be any such deployment both by emulation domestic politics in each country and in a losing game, considering how easily and by increasing its strategic offensive an important sense on the strategic-arms any moves in that direction could be off- capabilities. race itself. We believe that in contrast set by further improvements in missile Whereas the strategic-forces budget to some previous eras, when the motiva- accuracy. A defense of the Safeguard of the U.S. now amounts to about $9 tions for continuing arms races were type will probably also be judged to be billion per year (excluding some rather largely political and economic conflicts, a losing proposition. A very heavy de- large items for nuclear warheads, re- the strategic-arms race now has a life of 14,000 2,000 1963 1967 1971 1975 1979 1983 PROJECTED EFFECTS associated with three possible outcomes of ployment of MIRV's (B) could lead to stability in strategic forces the strategic-arms-limitation talks are expressed in the graphs on and a reduction in the budget to a level required to maintain them. these two pages in terms of the number of U.S. strategic offensive With an agreement that did not constrain MIRV's (C) there would warheads (left) and the U.S. budget for strategic forces (right). certainly be an increase in the strategic-forces budget for a few With no agreement (A] the number of weapons and the strategic- years as the composition of these forces changed, probably accom- forces budget are likely to grow with no obvious limit. A SALT panied by the replacement of some fixed-base offensive missiles by agreement that included a prohibition on the development and de- mobile systems (either land-based or sea-based) or possibly by its own. For instance, the strategic- ing suspicion and tension. Venturing Whether or not MIRV development weapons programs of each superpower into the realm of unprovable value judg- and deployment will be controlled may are more dependent on the programs of ments, however, we assert that it is not not be a question for the SALT nego- the other than on the levels of tension beyond the wit of man to design agree- tiators to consider, because of the in- between the two countries. If this race ments that would result in there being ability of one side or the other to decide can he attenuated, it would have a num- less objective cause for concern than if in a timely fashion the position it wishes ber of effects that would result in a the strategic-arms race continues un- to take on the issue. The rate of MIRV diminution of tensions and hence in a re- abated. In general, it would seem that development is so rapid that the ques- duction in the risk of war. That is per- any understanding that slowed the rate tion may thus be settled before the sub- haps the major reason for the urgency of development and change of strategic- stantive phase of the talks is well ad- of a serious SALT effort. Keeping budg- systems would have an effect in the right vanced. If such development is still in ets for strategic forces at low levels is direction. doubt, however, either because the talks desirable in its own right in that signifi- get to such substantive issues very quick- cant resources, both financial and intel- "Deyond affecting the probability of a ly or because of a moratorium on MIRV lectual, will be freed for more construc- nuclear exchange's beginning, one testing, MIRV limitation should be an tive purposes. More important, in the would like to see strategic forces struc- issue of the highest priority. U.S. lower military budgets will dimin- tured so that there -.vonld be at least The arguments for preventing deploy- ish the role of what President Eisenhow- some possibility that., if an exchange ment of MIRV's advanced enough to be er termed the military-industrial com- started, it would not have to run its effective counterforce weapons are per- plex: those who have a propensity for, course. A necessary but of course not suasive. They have been made at great and in some cases obviously a vested in- sufficient condition for this is that there length elsewhere (for example in public terest in, the acquisition of more arma- be no particular advantage to be gained hearings before committees of the Sen- ments and in exciting and maintaining from precipitate launch of more nuclear ate and the House of Representatives). t often unwarranted attitude of alarm weapons after a few have been dis- We simply summarize here by pointing d suspicion regarding an adversary's patched. By this criterion vulnerable out that if MIRV deployment is prevent- intentions. Lower military budgets in ICBM's would seem to be the quintes- ed, it may be possible to freeze the the U.S.S.R. would almost certainly have sence of undesirability. If both sides strategic balance at something approxi- a similar desirable effect. have them, each will recognize that if mating its present level. Most of the in- A poorly designed agreement could of they are withheld, they may be de- centive to defend hardened ICBM's or course prove to be a vehicle for increas- stroyed. to replace them with mobile systems will 26 1963 1967 1971 1975 1979 1983 "superhardening" and heavy specialized ABM defense of missile similar trends, but budget projections would differ somewhat. The sites. Assuming under case C that a large-scale ABM defense of Russian budget for strategic weapons is possibly at an unprece- population is prohibited, there would be little military rationale dentedly high level now, considering the present rapid rate of for either side to acquire large additional numbers of offensive growth in their strategic systems. Thus in case B the drop in the warheads. Nonetheless, the numbers might increase significantly strategic-forces budget for the U.S.S.R. might be sharper than for with the implementation of present plans to deploy MIRVs. the U.S., and in the two other cases there would be a less pro- Future Russian strategic-forces levels would probably display nounced increase. Estimates are in constant-value 1969 dollars. 1-QO have been reduced, if not eliminated. The arguments for continuing MIRV testing and then deployment because MIRV's may someday be required to penetrate an adversary's ABM defenses are not convincing. There is little doubt that currently designed U.S. MIRV's 1200 could be deployed on a time scale short compared with that required for deploy- ment of any significant Russian ABM defenses. Accordingly there is no need for any MIRV deployment pending firm evidence that the U.S.S.R. is beginning the construction of such defenses. And there is no need for further research and development tests unless a counterforce capability is intended. For similar rea- sons the U.S.S.R. should also abstain from further multiple-warhead tests and deployment, which it can do at no great risk lo its security. Essential to the survival of an agree- ment not to test MIRV's would be a prohibition of large-scale ABM deploy- ment. If ABM systems were deployed, the pressures to deploy MIRV's and to test them frequently in order to main- tain confidence in their reliability would be overwhelming. Furthermore, there would undoubtedly be great domestic pressures to develop and test more so- phisticated penetration aids. Under such circumstances neither side could have any confidence that the other was not de- veloping counterforce-effective MIRV's. An ABM freeze would be a logical- POLARIS-PQSEIDON ly required companion measure to any FORCE agreement prohibiting MIRV's. Assuming that ABM deployment and MIRV testing are both frozen, the other important component of a strategic- arms-limitation agreement would be an understanding to maintain something like parity in ICBM-force lev els by freez- ing these levels or preferably reducing them, and if necessary permitting re- placement of fixed-base ICBM's by mo- bile systems whose levels could be veri- fied by unilateral means. In the absence of such a measure there would be the DIMINISHING UTILITY of fixed-base intercontinental ballistic missiles < ICBM's» as a component of the U.S. "assured-destruction" forces would result from further development possibility of one side's gaining such a and deployment of MIR Vs, even in the event of a SALT agreement that freezes the number superiority in missile strength that, with of missiles on both side-. In preparing this graph it was assumed that in a preemptive, or improved accuracies and even without counterforce, strike against the U.S. the U.S.S.R. would target its SS-9 missile force (esti- MIRV's, would enable it to knock out a mated to be frozen at 280 missiles) at the U.S. Minuteman-Titan force. The numbers of large fraction of its adversary's forces by surviving U.S. ICBM's are based on the assumption that each SS-9 H ill carry one 25-megaton delivering a counterforce attack against warhead in 1970, three five-megaton warheads in 1975, nine 500-kiloton warheads in 1980 them. The reasons for concern about and 25 50-kiloton warheads in 1985; delivery accuracies are assumed to improve by a factor such a possibility have been identified of two every five years. Curve A assumes that no additional measures are taken to protect above: the probability of arms-race es- the already "hardened" U.S. ICBM force. Curve B assumes that the blast resistance of calation and the reduction in whatever the ICBM sites is improved b\ "superhardening" so that by 1972 they can withstand three small chance there may be of a nuclear times the overpressure sustainable in 1970. Curve C assumes full operational capability < and exchange's being terminated short of a generous estimate of performance) of the Safeguard ABM system by 1978. It is apparent that neither superhardening nor active defense I unless many times more effective than running its suicidal course. Safeguard) is likely to extend the period of invulnerability for U.S. ICBM's by very much. If the development of MIRV's that (The number of surviving submarine-launched missiles is based on the assumption that a are perceived by the adversary to have third of the Polaris-Poseidon force is destroyed in port by the Russian preemptive attack.) counterforce capability cannot be pre- vented (and we are pessimistic about siderable, and neither superpower is strategic armaments. In so doing we are preventing it), the relative importance of likely to be willing to greatly reduce tac- aware that many of our readers will be some of the measures discussed above tical antiaircraft capabilities in the con- dismayed that our discussion has been will be changed materially. A prohibi- text of SALT. ASW capabilities (except in the context of each superpower's pre- tion on large-scale ABM deployment for destroyers) would, on the other hand, serving the capability of destroying the would still be desirable, but it would be have little role other than attack against other. This has been so not because we less important; it would not in this case an adversary's missile-launching subma- ourselves favor the continuing retention prevent the MIRV genie from escaping rines. This is far truer now than it was a of huge stocks of thermonuclear weap- the bottle. Moreover, continuing devel- few years ago because the realization is ons but because we have tried to be re- opment and deployment of MIRV's more widespread that a major war in- alistic. The distrust that exists between would make a large-scale ABM defense volving large antishipping campaigns is the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. will induce unattractive simply on cost-effectiveness extremely unlikely. Third, neither the both to preserve the capability of de- grounds. U.S. nor the U.S.S.R. is likely to have stroying the other; such a capability, as enough confidence in bombers to rely we have noted, is unfortunately easier to A provision permitting the replace- much on them in a missile age even if air attain than an effective defense of one's -^^ ment of fixed ICBM's by mobile sys- defenses are constrained, whereas both own society, whether or not there are tems would seem virtually unavoidable superpowers obviously are prepared to agreements on strategic armaments. because of concern about the vulnerabil- rely heavily on submarine-launched mis- Both superpowers will preserve this ca- ity of the ICBM's to counterforce attack. siles. pability because they see it as the only Indeed, in the interest of stabilizing Finally, if counterforce-effective effective deterrent to the war that nei- arms at low levels, and to minimize MIRV's were a reality, and if as a con- ther wants or could win. concern about damage-limiting strikes, sequence both sides were to place reli- The most that can reasonably be ex- agreements could probably include mea- ance very largely on mobile systems, ad- pected of the forthcoming talks is a iirer s that would enhance the viability ditional offensive weapons on one side move toward a strategic balance where «' 'mobile systems. An area of agreement could not be used effectively to limit the (1) uncertainties about the adversary are that would seem to merit most serious other side's ability to retaliate. Consider- reduced and with them some of the ten- consideration would be prohibition on ing this fact and the fact that since stra- sions; (2) each side can inflict a level of certain improvements in antisubmarine- tegic-force levels are already at least an damage on the other sufficient to destroy warfare capabilities. Actually the possi- order of magnitude larger than is ratio- its society but neither feels a need to bility of breakthroughs in antisubmarine nally required for deterrence, there maintain a great overkill capability as warfare is extremely remote. It is prob- would be little incentive for either side a hedge against possible damage-limit- able that through noise reduction, ex- to acquire additional offensive capabili- ing efforts by the other; (3) there will be tension of missile range and other tech- ties. Also in this situation it would hardly an improved chance that a thermonu- niques the gap between ASW capability matter if either side were to introduce clear exchange, should one begin, would and the capability of the missile-launch- new assured-destruction systems such as, be terminated short of running its course, ing submarine to escape detection and for example, small mobile ICBM's that and (4) the levels of expenditure on stra- destruction will widen rather than nar- could not be easily counted. tegic armaments are lower, so that larger row. Yet it seems likely from recent de- Even this incomplete discussion fractions of the resources available to bate in the U.S. that the present Amer- shows that the strategic balance be- each society can be used for more con- ican leadership, and presumably the tween the superpowers is likely to be structive endeavors. leadership of the U.S.S.R. as well, would very different depending on whether or We believe that the realization of reluctant to rely solely on a missile- not MIRV development and ABM de- these objectives would be a tremendous • inching submarine force for deter- ployment are allowed to continue. Both accomplishment and one that is possible rence, given the possibility of further possibilities will have a serious impact without the solution of the deep-seated ASW development by its adversary. on future strategic postures, but with political problems of the Russian-Ameri- Constraints on ASW such as a limitation respect to ABM deployment nothing can confrontation. To go further will re- on the number of hunter-killer subma- much is going to happen overnight. quire dealing with those problems. We rines would increase the acceptability to Dealing with the issue of MIRV de- do not believe, however, that the super- both sides of relying more heavily on velopment, although perhaps no more powers can afford to delay attacking the missile-launching submarines for deter- important, is far more urgent. That is strategic-arms race while trying to solve rence. why it is the watershed issue for SALT. political differences. Regrettably the sit- Similar arguments might be made for If counterforce-effective MIRV's (and uation with respect to technical develop- limitations on or curtailment of air de- large-scale ABM deployment) can be ments (MIRV's, ABM defenses and nu- fense. Such moves would seem less re- stopped, the present strategic balance clear proliferation), and quite possibly alistic on three counts. First, compliance of force levels may endure for some time. with respect to domestic politics as well, with limitations on air-defense capabil- If such MIRV's are deployed, the bal- will probably make strategic-arms-limi- ities could probably not be verified with ance will unavoidably change in qual- tation negotiations less likely to be suc- unilateral procedures as well as could itative ways. How large an escalation in cessful several years hence than now. limitations on ASW systems, or for that the arms race will result will depend on Time is of the essence, and we write with matter on ABM systems. Intelligence on whether agreement to constrain or cut a feeling of urgency. Although our tone short-range antiaircraft systems is likely back other strategic systems could still is pessimistic, we do not despair. We are to be poorer than on hunter-killer sub- be negotiated. convinced that latent public support for marines, specialized ASW aircraft or an agreement could be exploited by ef- large-sized components of ABM systems. have attempted here to present fective political leadership on both sides Second, the overlap between tactical and an objective analysis of the pros- to reverse the trends we have lived with strategic antiaircraft capabilities is con- pects for various agreements to limit for two decades. V THE .INSTITUTE OF MAKL, AND SCIENCE UNITED NATIONS SEMINAR ON THE POLITICS OF DISARMAMENT INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT BY H.Eo AMBASSADOR J,A. DE ARAUJO CASTRO, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF BRAZIL TO THE UNITED NATIONS, DISARMAMENT IN THE °70°S - Semantics and Politics. Disarmament and Arms Control, - NPT and GCD - A process of devaluation - Power and the freezing of Power, 1945 and 1967„ Overkill and Over-overkill. - Back to Resolution 1722 (XVI) - Disarmament and Peace - Challenge and Response New York, 22 May 1970, SEMANTICS AND POLITICS, DISARMAMENT AND ARMS CONTROL, It might prove pertinent and useful to enquire and delve briefly into a problem of semantics* which may have a very direct bearing on a world problem of paramount importance, viz» the problem of Disarmament. We have made quite recently the point that, in the lexicon of the Super- -Power s, the word "'Dis- armament" is being„ slowly and gradually, superseded by the ex- pression "arms control". Recent and current events have proved that, most unfortunately^, this semantic approach is indicative of a new political attitude, on the part of the Super-Powers, as regards the problem of General and Complete Disarmament, and,, consequently, the proceedings and scope of the Geneva Conference of the Committee on Disarmament. Since the inception of its work, in 1962, the Committee, under the name of the Eighteen-Nations Disarmament Committee, has found it advisable to concentrate a considerable part of its efforts and time on the pursuit of collateral measures, such as non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and other measures of non-armament, such as the elaboration of a draft Treaty on the prohibition of the emplacement of nuclear weapons on the sea-bed and the ocean floor„ The records of the Conference on Disarmament will show that, in pursuing the colla- teral , the .Conference has lost track and sight of the essential, namely the negotiations which might lead to a Treaty on General .and Complete Disarmament, under strict and effective international control;, ajs recommended by Resolution 1722(XVI), which endorsed. j and- ratified the- Joiiat .Statement, of agreed principles for disar- .mamerit negotiations submitted on 20 September 1961 by the USSR and the United States of America. NPT AND GCD. Nothing could be more telling and more revealing, in this context, than the very terms of the over-heralded Non Pro- liferation Treaty. The Treaty is intended for a minimum initial period •©f twenty-five years, with the provision for extension for r <•: : ''.>••''' another twenty-five- years. This is a clear indication of the fact that those who negotiate the Treaty proceeded on the assump- tion that, for all that long period, the problem of nuclear dis- armament will not have received ana adequate settlement and that mankind will hopefully coexist with weapons and devices which constantly threaten and jeopardize its own survival. This simple consideration makes it quite transparent that, at heart, we have ": . •: despaired of Disarmament, just as we appear to have despaired of of ipeace. A PROCESS OF DEVALUATION As a matter of fact, we in the United Nations have be- come silent witnesses to a general and most alarming phenomenon of the progressive - or should we say regressive? - downgrading of the high objectives of the Organization,, We appear to have des- paired of the grand designs of Peace and Security and to be con- tent to concentrate on the so-called "new tasks", such as the pre- servation of the environment, population, science and technology et ".coetera. Disarmament has faded away into "'arms control" or "limitation of armaments". We dare no longer speak of Peace? we have toned down our ambitions to the point of being satisfied with "detente" or "relaxation of tensions". We dare no longer speak of "political settlements"; we aim at "cease-fires" and "armistices". We appear to have given up the search for collec- tive security; we now speak of "security assurances". We live in a world where men perish daily in open warfare; yet we are preparing to comfort ourselves and the world with the fallacious nption that the United Nations has managed to preserve world peace in these last twenty-five years. What has happened in the 4. the effort towards Disarmament is really a reflection of the scaling- down of expectations in other areas. And all this process of down- grading and devaluation is being carried out in the name of realism? which, in diplomatic jargon, has come to mean the passive acceptance of Power as the only yardstick to gauge the acts of Men and the actions of nations. POWER AND THE FREEZING OF POWER, OVERKILL AND OVER-OVERKILL. The main reason why "disarmament" dissolved into "arms con- ' l trol" and "limitation of armament" lies in the fact that the two Super- Powers, in their current negotiations, do not aim at the suppression of Power as a valid means for the pursuit and attainment of political ob- jectives but rather at a stabilization of Power on the basis of two ar- bitrary historical dates - 1945, year of the signing of the United Na- tions Charter, with its plank of Five Permanent Members, endowed with special rights' and prerrogatives, and 1967, deadline for nations to qualify as nuclear-weapon States, under the terms of the Non-Prolifera- tion Treaty. The current SALT negotiations appear to be conducted on the premise.-'that both Super-Powers will retain their "overkill" capa- bility . It ;seems to be taken for granted that both Super-Powers are entitled to retain this capacity forever, or at least until doomsday. 5. The objective of the talks is reportedly to explore the possibility of negotiating the elimination of that amount of strategical weapons which may exceed and transcend the normal levels of overkill, or, in other words, the possibility of eliminating the over-overkill„ However, we do not in any way minimize the importance of such SALT negotiations,, We earnestly hope that they will bear fruit and ultimately be successful as a first step towards the limitation of nuclear armaments and as a landmark in the process of detente. Even if they are not decisive in the field of Disarmament, they may prove significant in the field of Peace and understanding among nations. BACK TO RESOLUTION 1722(XVI) If the effort in the Disarmament field is to amount to any- thing more significant than a mere endeavour towards the stabilization of power on the current levels of overkill, we should revert to the spirit of 1961, and to the terms of resolution 1722 (XVI) and of the "Joint Statemenf'of 20 September 1961. Arms control may, at best, be a stage of, but never a substitute for, Disarmament,, It should be pointed out that the twenty-fourth Regular Session of the General As- sembly had a strong reaction against the current semantic game and took a positive stand in favour of the pursuit of General and Complete Dis- armament . 6. This was largely due to the efforts of Medium and Small nations, which felt called upon to set forth their views„ thus preventing decisions on matters of disarmament from being left exclusively to the discretion of a co-chairmanship exercised by the two Super- Powers. By Resolution 2606(XXIV)Ej the General Assembly declared the Decade of the 70°s as a Disarmament Decades called upon Gov- ernments to concentrate efforts towards the negotiation of a Trea- ty on General and Complete Disarmament under strict and effective international control and requested the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament to resume its work as soon as possible "bearing in mind that the ultimate goal is General and Complete Disarmament"„ The stand taken by the General Assembly on this matter is one of the high points of the last Regular Session, which contrary to a blatant pessimism in the press, may yet come to be considered a turning point in the life and history of the Organization, because of the more affirmative position of the Smaller States on the im- portant matters of Peace, Security, Disarmament and Development, It is imperative for the current proceedings of the CCD to reflect the directives clearly set forth by the General Assembly, lest we come to the conclusion that the rulings of the two co-Chairmen are more cogent and binding than the decisions and recommendations of 126 Members of the community of nations. We are not contending that we should ignore the possibility and desirability of any effective measure of arms control„ Our firm view is that any ef- fort in this field should be inserted into the framework of the United Nations responsibility in the field of General and Complete Disarmament. That is why we hold to the opinion that the Super- Powers should make -every effort to keep the CCD informed of the conduct of SALT negotiations. This could be done by the Co- Chairmen of the CCD, through the presentation of periodical pro- gress reports, as often as political circumstances make it possi- ble and desirable. DISARMAMENT AND PEACE We have stated in another forum that, compared to Dis- + armament, any other international problem is relatively simple to ; •: settle, since in any given settlement the PaEtlers~"Bave:'a rough idea of what each is giving and taking, yielding and ac- quiring. And a solution reached today may be altered tomorrow if one Party keeps or is capable of developing the military means 8, adequate to secure a change in the status quo. Woridhhistory has always"/ been a reflection of the vicissitudes of Power and military force. In the field of Disarmament, however, any false step may be irreversible, since it strikes at the very roots of Power. That is why we are convinced that we cannot successfully deal with this problem of Disarmament if we try to settle it in the abstract, i.e., detached from the problem of Peace and from the problem created by the prevalence of the use of Force in in- ternational affairs. Let us have the courage to face its no significant prqgress will be achieved on this all pervasive ques- tion of Disarmament as long as Power and Force are used, in a free and unhampered manner, to foster and secure the settlement of political or territorial claims and objectives. No nation will disarm in the middle of a war and as long as the use of naked force pays dividends, defensive or offensive. If the present trend continues, if Force continues to be used, the wqrld arms race will be accelerated, arid we may well achieve General and Complete Annihilation before we come to 9. -anything- resembling General and Complete Disarmament. It is a delusion to think that Disarmament can be negotiated on a battle- field. CHALLENGE AND RESPONSE We can reconcile ourselves neither to the idea of a "tolerable state of warfare" as a substitute for Peace, nor to the idea of a "tolerable arms race" as a substitute for Disarma- ment. If the challenge is so ominous as to coincide with the ••».)'..''• very survival of Mankind, we should respond with something more than "political realism", which implies the passive acceptance of Power. We should respond with imagination, creativeness and bold new ideas. And Disarmament is one of those bold new ideas, still untried and still not put to the test. It will take a good deal of courage and determination to transform it into reality. But it cannot be argued with any degree of validity that it will take more courage to face Peace and Disarmament than to face War and ultimate Annihilation. fi!!T ro 5: en c» SG luncheon for Mr. Harasimhan, Thursday, 21 May 1970* !•!!? p.m., 58th floor Mr . Narasimhan Hie Secretary-General no • Gtete-Jr-Adeko (previous engagenent) no Bj?-*--Buaiehe- (previous engagement) no -M.^-de--Se3«i&B (previous engagement) ,/M. Djermakoye •^x M. Gherab ix Mr. Hamid w Mr. Hill ,/ Mr. Hofflnan •^ Dr. Hoo no Bj?»-Kn*akev' (away) iXMr. Labouisse no M3?»-H©eek (away) •^X"Mr. Rolz-Bennett no Mr-.--Stark (previous engagement) \X Mr. Stavropoulos iX Mr. Turner no -Mr-.-^feugiian (previous engagement) 12 ec: George Reception for the members of the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace Wednesday, May 20, 1970 6 to 7 p.m. Library Penthouse 3 h*/-jo Members of the Commission Richard A. Falk % Oontci1 fur Advanuud Dbudies Mr. Nelson Bengston (and Mrs.) Princeton, New jaroey. 200 East 36th Street New York, N.Y. 10016 /Dr. Wolfgang Friedmann t ^ Law School Mr. Donald Blaisdell (and Mrs.) Columbia University 50 Morningside Drive New York, N.Y. 10027 New York, N.Y. 10027 /Reverend Donald S. Harrington (and Mrs.) s/Mr. Jacob Blajretein (and Mrs.) v Community Church of New York \Alhe Blaustei/d Building ho East 35th Street One North £harles Street New York, N.Y. 10016 • Baltimor^> Maryland 21203 //^/Dr. Arthur Jf^Holcombe (and Mrs.) Dr. Harrison-Thrown v The Kenijptforth - Apt. ikOk 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Room 2lif Washington, D.C. Mrs. Edward W. McVitty (and Mr.) Ul West 10th Street Mr. John Carey (and Mrs.) New York, N.Y. 10011 Coudert Brothers 200 Park Avenue N/Dr. Gerard Mangone New York, N.Y. 10017 V^ Conwell Ha^i / Temple University Mr. Benjamin V. Cohen JL./JH Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122 1727 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. .-20Q36 'Mr. Raymond D. Nasher (and Mrs.) 35th floor Mr. Norman Cojuglns (and Mrs.) Republic National Bank Tower Saturday Beview CL. Dallas, Texas 75201 :0 380 Madison Avenue fork., N.Y. 10017 yMr. Leslie Paffrath (and Mrs.) ^ The Johnson Foundation , /Mr. Thom%s^Curtis 33 East Four Mile Road ^ 1609 Bed/ton Street Racine, Wisconsin 53^01 Bajitimore, Maryland 21217 •. WalterXReuther (and Mrs.) /Mr. Clark M. Eichelberger (and Mrs.) Solidarity House v 139 East 33rd Street 8000 Eafrt Jefferson New York, N.Y. 10016 J.I3. Detroit, Michigan . Luther H. Evans (and Mrs.) Schaum Butler Library - Room 210 ^ Bankers Trust Company Columbia University 750 Third Avenue New York, N.Y. 10Q17 New York, N.Y. 10017 Hugh Moore and Dixie JL/A Easton, Pennsylvania 180U2 Total: 108 (actual attendance 66) - 2 - Members of the Commission (continued) Mr. and Mrs. John French 144 East 38th Street . /6r. Louis B. Sohn (and Mrs.) New York, N.Y. 10016 VApt. D-810 2440 Virginia Avenue, N.W. . and Mrs. Be&ert Gilmore Washington, D.C. 20037 39 West m« Street New . Richard N. Swift Barrow Street . and Mrs .^Seth Glickenhaus New York, N.Y. 100 Dorchester Road Scarsjjede, New York /Dr. Quincy Wright (and Mrs.) ^/ 906 Fendal Terrace \/Mrs. S.B. Grlmson Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 203 East/f2nd Street New Ypafk, N.Y. 10021 Commission Associates and Guests Dr. Claude E. Hawley 5 Tudor City Place Mr. Malcolm Andresen New York, N.Y. 10017 ..40 Broadway New York, N.Y. Mrs. Bess Horowitz 50 Riverside Drive . and Mrs. Dana C. Backus New York, N.Y. 1158 Fifth Avenue / New York, N.Y. 10028 Mrs. Amie Joseph 60 Button Place South Mrs. Ruth Bishop New York, N.Y. 10022 460 Park Avenue New York, N.Y. 10022 /Mrs. Lucy B. Lemann 525 Park Avenue /Mr. and Mrs. John Briscoe New York, N.Y. ^ Silent Meadow Farm Lakeville, Connecticut 06039 Mr. Lawrence Mayers, Jr. 307 Fifth Avenue . and Mrs. Benjamin Buttenwieser New York, N.Y. East 52 Street ew York, N.Y. 10022 Miss Myrna Loy 425 East 63rd Street Miss Bonnie Cashin New York, N.Y. 10021 866 United Nations Plaza New York, N.Y. 10017 . Edwardx^ Marrow Glen Alden Farm . and MpG, Arthur H. Dean Pawling New York Gracie Square New YOrk, .N.Y. Mr. and Mrs. John Musser 260 Salem Church Road fjt I/Mrs. Raymond Eaerson At Si St. Paul, Minnesota Estabrook Bead Concord^mssachusetts Mrs. MauricePafee 330 Easjt^fth Street s. Marshallxileld A/o NgSP-^fSrk, N.Y. 10017 136 East 79th Street New YorJ VMr. George F./Sprague (continued) ^ Executive Director Reader's Digest Foundation Pleasantville, New York 10570 Dr. Roger Revelle Center for Population Studies 9 Bow* Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Mr. Jacob Betof sky 15 Unioj*^q.uare New^fork, New York Mr. York Langton 25 Chovea Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55^10 Mr. Douglas Fairbanks BlackstoneJSotel /y 0 50 East^gth Street New Y0f£, Hew York Mri, and Mrs. John Branch 65 Broad Street Rochester, New York Arthur Connorton 55 St. Paul Street Rochester, New York / Mr. and Mrs. Aaron Danzig 350 Fifth Avenue New York, N.Y. 10001 Professor and Mrs. Richard N. Gardner School of Law Columbia University New York, N.Y. 1002? Dr. Thomas Frank Center for International Studies New York University Washington Square New York, N.Y. 10003 Mr. Howard Effron (continued) 30 East 42nd Street New York, N.Y. 1001? Dr. Vernon Ferwerda 20 Brunswick Road Troy, New York 12180 - -5 - Under/Assistant Secretaries-General; /VO t/^CMer diid Mib. Adelio j/ Dr. and Mrs. Bunche flf., Q ^\/\S MMP •—and~~J . Id!***ini'D** ' M—~~Myo*y n-^-i-iionc^ —n ^/ Mr. and Mrs. Rajendra Coomaraswamy ,/M. de Seynes /Mr. and Mrs. Djermakoye f/ Mr. and Mrs. Gherab l/ Mr. and Mrs. Hamid /\/c> ljX Mi»i—aud Mi's. Palll-Mai'i; Ileiii'y ^Mr. and Mrs. Hill /Mr. and Mrs. Hoffman ../Dr. Hoo *. and Mrs. Kutakov -Mr&, /Mr. mid Mi" a. Narasimhan ,/Mr. and Mrs. Rolz-Bennett ^/ Mr. and Mrs. Stark ^X Mr. and Mrs. Stavropoulos y Mr. and Mrs. Turner . and Mrs. Vaughan The Secretary-General v Mr. and Mrs. Korle COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE 866 UNITED NATIONS PLAZA — NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 Chairmen Telephone: (212) 688-4665 JAMES T. SHOTWELL (1939-1955) Cable Address: COSTORPE ARTHUR N. HOLCOMBE (1955-1964) CLARK M. EICHELBERGER^( 1964-1968) TouTs B. SOHNT1968T971, on leave 1970) Chairman Ad Interim (1970) RICHARD N. SWIFT April 27, 1970 Executive Committee LUTHER H. EVANS, Chairman BENJAMIN V. COHEN NORMAN COUSINS VERNON L. FERWERDA The Secretary-General to the FRANK P. GRAHAM United Nations GERARD J. MANGONE United Nations LESLIE PAFFRATH New York, New York 10017 RAYMOND D. NASHER WILLIAM R. ROALFE URBAN G. WHITAKER, JR. Dear Mr. Secretary-General: RICHARD R. WOOD QUINCY WRIGHT I cannot tell you how deeply we appreciate your extending Executive Director the invitation for May 20th. I have given a suggested guest CLARK M. EICHELBERGER list to Mr. Lemieux which contains members of the Commission, its supporters and other internationally minded people whose Treasurer interest we wish to enlist. PHILLIP SCHAUM Secretary About the program, we had planned to speak briefly of MARGARET OLSON the last two Reports of the Commission, particularly "The United Nations: The Next Twenty-five Years" which fits in so well with the plans for the observance of the twenty- fifth anniversary. Would it Tae possible for you to say a word of the significance of the anniversary, and possibly call on one of us, Luther Evans, Richard Swift or myself to speak briefly of the substance of our Report? We had not planned any other presentation or speeches. Faithfully yours, Clark M. CMB/sc Members of the COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE Honorary Members Frank G. Boudreau, "M.D. Charles G. Fenwick Ben M. Cherrington Charles E. Martin Malcolm W. Davis Amos E. Taylor Members Leonard P. Aries H. Field Haviland, Jr. David A. Baldwin John Herz Arthur W. Barber . Willard N. Hogan Cyril J. Bath Arthur N...Holcombe Nelson Bengston H. Stuart ,Hiiglies Clarence A. Berdahl Elmore Jackson Donald C. Blaisdell Philip E. Jacob Jacob Blaustein Anne Hartwell Johnstone Roy Blough Hans Kohn Charles C. Bolte Arthur-Larson David B. Brooks Joseph 1?, Lash Harrison Brown '-• Walter H. C? Laves James B.r-Carey -Gerard •}. Mangone John Garey.- Marion H. McVitty J. Michael Cavitt Donald N, Michael Waldo Chamberlin Hugh Moore Daniel S. Cheever Raymond D. Nasher Carl Q. Christol 1 Joseph S. Nye Francis" T. Christy.,', Jr. Leslie Paffrath Joseph 5. Clark: ' James Patton Benjamin Y- Cohen -Josephine W. Pomerance John R. Coleman Charles C. Price Norman Cousins Walter P. Reuther Arthur M. Cox Roger Revelle Edwird P. Curtis,; Jr. William R. Roalfe Thomas Curtis J. William Robinson Royden Dangerfield Irving Salomon Aaron L. Danzig Oscar Schachter Vera Micheles Dean Stephen M. Schwebel Oscar A> de Lima1 James H. Sheldon Clark M. Eichelberger Louis B. Sohn Rupert Emerson Eugene Staley Luther H. Evans C. Maxwell Stanley Richard Falk Alonzo T. Stephens Vernori L. Ferwerda John G. Stoessinger Roger Fisher Richard N. Swift Thomas M. Franck Obert C. Tanner Gerald Freund Howard Taubenfeld Wolfgang Friedmann David V. Tiffany Richard N. Gardner Richard W. Van Wagenen Benjamin Gerig Paul W. Walter Arthur J. Goldberg Urban G: Whitaker, Jr. Lelsnd M. Goodrich Francis O. Wilcox Frank P. Graham Harris Wofford L. Allen Grooms, Jr. Richard R. Wood Ernst B. Haas Quincy Wright Donald S. Harrington t . COMMISSION TD STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE 866 UNITED NATIONS PLAZA — NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 Chairmen Telephone: (212) 688-4665 JAMES T. SHOTWELL (1939-1955) ^ Cable Address: COSTORPE ARTHUR N. HOLCOMBE (1955-1964) CLARK M. EICHELBERGER (1964-1968) April 15, 1970 Louis B. SOHN (1968-1971, on leave 1970) Chairman Ad Interim (1970) RICHARD N. SWIFT Executive Committee LUTHER H. EVANS, Chairman Mr. Lucxen Lemieux CLARENCE A. BERDAHL BENJAMIN V. COHEN Executive Office of the Secretary-General NORMAN COUSINS United Nations VERNON L.-FERWERDA Hew York, New York 10017 FRANK P. GRAHAM GERARD J. MANGONE Bear Mr. Lemieux: LESLIE PAFFRATH RAYMOND D. NASHER WILLIAM R. ROALFE When I saw the Secretary-General on March 23rd, he URBAN G. WHITAKER, JR. generously accepted our invitation to attend a reception RICHARD R. WOOD given by the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace QUINCY WRIGHT for some members of the Commission Associates and guests. I was to consult you as to the date as soon as we had Executive Director some detailed arrangements made. I did not realize that CLARK M. EICHELBERGER you were going abroad with the Secretary-General. Treasurer PHILLIP SCHAUM The reception will last from five o'clock to seven o'clock, thus making it possible for the Secretary-General Secretary to come at five-thirty for a brief period. The reception MARGARET OLSON will be at the home of Mrs, Maurice Pate, 330 East i«-9th Street. She has an attractive penthouse. The Secretary-General said it would be convenient for him to attend a reception the first week of May, but inasmuch as more time had elapsed than anticipated, it would be easier to make the arrangements for the second or third week of May than the first week. Would it be~ possible for him to make one of the later dates? If not, we shall make the arrangements for the first week of May. Becauseeof the temptation of weekends in the country, it might be better to avoid Mondays or Fridays. The only date which I could not keep myself would be on Wednesday, May 13th, when I am delivering an address in Minneapolis. After we get the details set, I shall call you to talk over the details for the program. But I think the Secretary- General, from our conversation, understands that it is to discuss the two reports of the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace this year; "The United Nations: The Next Twenty-five Years" and "The United Nations and the Bed of the Sea," both of which he is familiar. Members of the COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE Honorary Members Frank G. Boudreau, M.D. Charles G. Fenwick Ben M. Cherrington Charles E. Martin Malcolm W. Davis Amos E. Taylor Members Leonard P. Aries H. Field Haviland, Jr. David A. Baldwin Johrrfterz Arthur W. Barber Willard N. Hogan Cyril J. Bath Arthur N. Holcombe Nelson Bengston H. Stuart Hughes Clarence A. Berdahl Elmore Jackson Donald 'C. Blais'dell • Philip E. Jacob JacobvBlaustein .Anne Hartwell Johnstone -- Roy B. lough Hans Kohn 'Charles ,C. Bolte Arthur Larson David B. Brooks . Joseph P. Lash Harrison'Brown . Walter H. C.Taves 'James B. Carey - • Gerard J. Mangone 'John Carey ' Marion H. McVitty J. Michael Cavitt Donald N. Michael .Waldpr Chamberlin . •- -Hugh Moore Daniel S. Cheever Raymond D.iNasher ,Carl Q. Christoi''' Joseph S. Nye' Francis T. Christy, Jr;- Leslie Paffrath Joseph-.S. Clark James Patton Benjamin .V. Cohen Josephine -W. Pomerance John R. Coleman Charles C. Price Norman Cousins Walter P. Reuther Arthur M. Cox Roger Revelle Edward P.' Curtis, Jr. William R. Roalfe ' Thomas Curtis •' J. William Robinson .' Royden Dangerfield 'Irving Salomon Aaron L. Danzig . •••- Oscar Schachter Vera Micheles Dean Stephen M. Schwebel Oscar A. deLima James H. Sheldon Clark M.' Eichelberger Louis B. Sohn Rupert Emerson Eugene Staley Luther H. :Evans ;' C: Maxwell Stanley Richard-Falk Aldnzo 'T. Stephens Vernon L. Fer-werda John G. Stoessinger Roger Fisher Richard N. Swift Thomas .M. Franck Obert C. Tanner Gerald Freund Howard Taubenfeld Wolfgang Friedmann- David V.-Tiffany Richard N. Gardner' Richard W. Van Wagenen Benjamin Gerig . • Paul W. Walter Arthur J. Goldberg. Urban G. Whitaker, Jr. L?l»rid M. Goodrich Francis O. Wilcox • Fra'nk P. Graham J Harris Wofford ' L. Allen Grooms, Jr. Richard R. Wood Ernst B. Haas Quincy Wright Donald S. Harrington Mr. Lemieux -2- April 15, 1970 You know how grateful we are that the Secretary-General will be present. With all best wishes, Faithfully yours, Clark M. Eichelberger COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE 866 UNITED NATIONS PLAZA — NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 Chairmen Telephone: (212) 688-4665 JAMES T. SHOTWELL (1939-1955) Cable Address: COSTORPE ARTHUR N. HOLCOMBE (1955-1964) CLARK M. EICHELBERGER (1964-1968) Louis B. SOHN (1968-1971, on leave 1970) Chairman Ad Interim (1970) RICHARD N. SWIFT Executive Committee LUTHER H. EVANS, Chairman May 1970 CLARENCE A. BERDAHL BENJAMIN V. COHEN NORMAN COUSINS VERNON L. FERWERDA FRANK P. GRAHAM GERARD J. MANGONE Mrs. Estella Mira LESLIE PAFFRATH Room 3800C RAYMOND D. NASHER United Nations WILLIAM R. ROALFE New York, New York URBAN G. WHITAKER, JR. 10017 RICHARD R. WOOD QUINCY WRIGHT My dear Mrs* Mira: Executive Director I would appreciate invitations being sent to CLARK M. EICHELBERGER Mr. Howard Effron , 30 East >2nd Street, Hew York, Treasurer New York and Dr. Vernon Ferwerda, 20 Brunswick Road, PHILLIP SCHAUM Troy, Hew York 12180. ^ Secretary MARGARET OLSON Clark M. Eichelberger CME/sc Members of the COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE Honorary Members Frank G. Boudreau, M.D. Charles G. Fenwick Ben M. Cherrington Charles E. Martin Malcolm W. Davis Amos E. Taylor Members Leonard P. Aries H. Field Haviland, Jr. David A. Baldwin John Herz Arthur W. Barber Willard N. Hogan Cyril J. Bath . Arthur JST.' Holcombe Nelson Bengston H., Stuart, Hughes Clarence A. Berdahl Elmore Jackson Donald C. Blaisdell Philip E. Jacob Jacob Blaustein '•Anne Har'twell Johnstone Roy Blough Hans Kohn Charles C. Bolte Arthur Larson David B. Brooks Joseph P. Lash Harrisoj Brown , Walter H. C. Laves .James B. Carey . Gerard J. Mangone _JohT . n_ Care— ,.y •_ *- : Marion hf. McVitty ^•Michael Cavitt •• 1 Donald N. Michael Waldo Chamberlin -Hugh cMobFe Daniel S. Cheever Raymond D. Nasher Carl Q. Christol Joseph S. Nye Francis T. Christy, Jr. Leslie Paffrath Joseph S. Clark James Patton Benjamin V. Cohen Josephine W. Pomerance John R. Coleman Charles C. Price Norman Cousins . Walter P. Reuther Arthur M. Cox Roger Revelle Edward P. Curtis, Jr. William R. Roalfe Thomas Curtis J. William Robinson Royden Dangerfield Irving Salomon Aaron L. Danzig Oscar Schachter Vera Micheles Dean Stephen M. Schwebel Oscar A. de Lima James H. Sheldon Clark M. Eichelberger Louis B. Sohn Rupert Emerson Eugene Staley Luther H. Evans C. Maxwell Stanley Richard Falk Alonzo T. Stephens Vernon L. Ferwerda John G. Stoessinger Roger Fisher Richard N. Swift Thomas M. Franck Obert C. Tanner Gerald Freund Howard Taubenfeld Wolfgang Friedmann David V. Tiffany Richard N. Gardner Richard W. Van Wagenen Benjamin Gerig Paul W. Walter Arthur J. Goldberg Urban G. Whitaker, Jr. Leland M. Goodrich Francis O. Wilcox Frank P. Graham Harris Wofford L. Allen Grooms, Jr. Richard R. Wood Ernst B. Haas Quincy Wright Donald S. Harrington COMMISSION TD STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE 866 UNITED NATIONS PLAZA — NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 Chairmen Telephone: (212) 688-4665 JAMES T. SHOTWELL (1939-1955) Cable Address: COSTORPE ARTHUR N. HOLCOMBE (1955-1964) CLARK M. EICHELBERGER (1964-1968) Louis B. SOHN (1968-1971, on leave 1970) Chairman Ad Interim (1970) May 7, 1970 RICHARD N. SWIFT Executive Committee LUTHER H. EVANS, Chairman CLARENCE A. BERDAHL BENJAMIN V. COHEN NORMAN COUSINS VERNON L. FERWERDA FRANK P. GRAHAM Dear Mr. Lemieux: GERARD J. MANGONE LESLIE PAFFRATH If it is not an inconvenience, the following RAYMOND D. NASHER members of the Commission might receive WILLIAM R. ROALFE URBAN G. WHITAKER, JR. invitations for May 20th: RICHARD R. WOOD QUINCY WRIGHT Mr. and Mrs. Aaron Danzig 350 Fifth Avenue Executive Director New York, N.Y. 10001 CLARK M. EICHELBERGER Treasurer Professor and Mrs. Richard N. Gaasdner PHILLIP SCHAUM School of Law Columbia University Secretary New York, N.Y. 10027 MARGARET OLSON (' s ./Dr. Thomas Frank 0 'yd < CenteCfen+.o-rn fo-Prvrn InternationaTn+.e-n1 l Studies New York University Washington Square ^ New York, N.Y. 10003 Thank you very much. Faithfully yours, Clark M. Eichelberger Mr. Lucien Lemieux Office of the Secretary-General United Nations New York Members of the COMMISSION TO STUDY THE ORGANIZATION OF PEACE Honorary Members- Frank G. Boudreau, M.D. Charles G. Fenwick Ben M. Cherrington Charles E. Martin Malcolm W. Davis Amos E. Taylor Leonard P. Aries H. Field Haviland, Jr. David A. Baldwin John Herz Arthur W. Barber , Willard N. Hogan Cyril J. Bath Arthur N. Holcombe Nelson-Bengston H. Stuart Hughes Clarence"A. Berdahl * Elrriore Jackson Donald C. Blaisdell Philip E. Jacob Jacob Blaustein Anne Hartwell Johnstone Roy Blough Hans Kohn Charles C. Bolte Arthur Larson David B. Brooks Joseph P. Lash Harrison Brown Walter H. C. Laves James B. Carey Gerard J. Mangone John Carey Marion H. McVitty J. Michael Cavitt: • Donald N: "Michael Waldo Chamberlin Hugh Moore Daniel S. Cheever Raymond D. Nasher Carl Q. Christol Joseph S. Nye Francis T. Christy, Jr. Leslie Paffrath Joseph S. Clark James Patton Benjamin V. Cohen Josephine W. Pomerance John R. Coleman Charles C. Price Norman Cousins Walter P. Reuther Arthur M. Cox Roger Revelle Edward P. Curtis, Jr. ' William R. Roalfe Thomas Curtis J. William Robinson Hoyden Dangerfield Irving Salomon Aaron L. Danzig • Oscar Schachter Vera Micheles Dean Stephen M. Schwebel Oscar A. de Lima James H. Sheldon Clark M. Eichelberger Louis B. Sohn Rupert Emerson Eugene Staley Luther H. Evans C. Maxwell Stanley Richard JFalk Alonzo T. Stephens Vernon. L. Ferwerda John G. Stoessinger Roger Fisher Richard N. Swift Thomas M. Franck Obert C. Tanner Gerald Freund Howard Taubenfeld Wolfgang Friedmann : David V. Tiffany Richard N. Gardner Richard W. Van Wagenen Benjamin Gerig Paul W. Walter Arthur J. Goldberg Urban G. Whitaker, Jr. Lsrland M. Goodrich Francis O. Wilcox Frank P. Graham Harris Wofford L. Allen Grooms, Jr. Richard R. Wood Ernst B. Haas Quincy Wright Donald S. Harrington To promote through education and a wider knowledge of the support of the United Nations . need and means of securing peace INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL O R D R and under its auspices The World Law Fund ELEVEN WEST FORTY-SECOND STREET • NEW YORK, N. Y. 10036 WISCONSIN 7-2723 BOARD EARL D. OSBORN President J. A. MIGEL Vice President SIDNEY P. HOWELL, JR. May 7, 1970 Pice President Chairman, Grants Committee HARRY B. HOLLINS Vice President Chairman, World Law Fund ROBERT H. KNIGHT Secretary- Treasurer . O. ADEBO The Secretary-Gen era I GREY DIMOND MRSTjACK. HAUSMAN United Nations PAUL G. HOFFMAN ARTHUR LARSON New York, N.Y. MRS. GEORGE A. LITTLE MRS. HARVEY PICKER LOUIS B. SOHN HAROLD TAYLOR Dear Mr. Secretary: ROBERT M. MacIVER Mr. Earl D. Osborrr gratefully accepts your kind invitation Director Emeritus to attend the reception for members of the Commission to Study the MRS. ANITA KAYE Executive Secretary Organization of Peace on Wednesday, the 20th of May. Cordially yours, ^(-^^-^&^ />^y U and Mrs. Hla Maung (222-7251 ) V Mr. Kevin Hla Maung i/H.E. U Soe Tin and Mrs. Soe Tin .E. U San Maung, Ambassador of the Union of Burma to the USA (card sent in care of H.E. U Soe Tin) and Mrs. Shwe Mra and Mrs. Richard Paw U ./Mr. and Mrs. Alain Y. Morvan l/U and Mrs. Thaung Iwin (Deputy Permanent Representative of Burma) . and Mrs. James Harrington (211 Inwood Avenue, Upper Montclair, N.J. 0704? 201 7H-2368) U and Mrs. Thant 18 on IE a? x -9. c SGluncheon, Monday, 11 May 1970, 1.15 p.m., 58th floor y Mr. Norman Cousins, Editor, Saturday Review /Mr. John Volkmar, Associate Quaker Representative, Quaker UK Program, V East 46th Street v Mr. Barrett Hollister, Director, Quaker UN Program I/ Mr. Robert Fleisher, Senior Vice President, Ruder and Finn, 110 East 59th Street n?he Secretary-General no Dr-.'-Bunche no Mrvitoi-zr-'Benneirfc ^J M. de Seynes s/^Cliief Adefco i/Mr. Muller 8 cc: George .00 glvea lay tlss' x C.G SG luncheon, Friday, 8 May 1970; 1»15 P-m., 58th floor t,/ Mr. Robert S. Benjamin Mr. Arthur Krim The Secretary-General i/Dr. Bunche j/Miss Henderson Mr. Stark cc: George S-i (D ' 00 cf fcy Iti© * H.E. iyad x Sir* ?fenjs^ x l ' r*"* SG luncheon, Wednesday, 6 May 1970, 1-15 p.m., 58th floor v H.E. Syed Amjad All (Chairman, Committee on Contributions - card sent care of Miss Petersen, Room 3?63, 28 April) H E V 1 ' - Mr* Agha Shahi - Pakistan y Mr. A.I. Osmany (Chairman, Board of Auditors, Room 1833) The Secretary-General no Brr-Bnnche v^Mr. Hamid \/ Mr. Turner cc: George k May 1970 The Secretary-General's luncheon to bid farewell to H.E. M. Abdallahi Quid Daddah Tuesday, 5 May 1970, 1:15 P.m.» 58th floor Mr. Muller Mr. Hildyard x M. Dahmouche x Sr. Rolz-Bennett Dr. Bunche x H.E. M. Boye H.E. M. Ghorra H.E. M. Kosciusko-Morizet H.E. M. Quid Daddah X X The Secretary-General H.E. Mr. Malik x H.E. U Soe Tin IH.E. Mr. Farah X H.E. Mr. Mojsov H.E. Mr. Buffxun x Mr. Hamid Mr. Korle SG luncheon to "bid farewell to His Excellency Monsieur Abdallahi Ould Daddah, Tuesday, 5 May 1970, 1.13 p.m., 38th floor \/ H.E. M. Abdallahi Ould Daddah - Mauritania no H-»E.-MF»-Gha3?lee-WT-¥e6* USA (hosting luncheon) u/H.E. Mr. William B. Buffum - USA 1/H.E. Mr. Y.A. Malik - USSR ^/H.E. M. Jacques Kosciusko-Morizet - France no H»E-.-te3«el-Ga]?a€leH UK (hosting luncheon) (Amb.Warner away) I/Mr. David H.T. Hildyard, C.M.G., D.F.C. - UK i/H.E. M. Ibrahima Boye - Senegal v/H.E. M. Edouard Gthorra - Lebanon ^/H.E. Mr. Abdulrahim Abby Farah - Somalia ^/Monsieur Amar Dahmouche - Algeria (Charge* d*Affaires) no -H»ET-M]?T-Milke-Sa3?aT9aHev Buigaria (away) v/'H.E. U Soe Tin - Burma no H^E-r-MpT-Sveajkeap-C-r-AB-feijeffi Sweden (away) •l/H.E. Mr. Lazar Mojsov - Yugoslavia The Secretary-General x/Dr. Bunche no Mrr-Katafecnr (away) no Mr-Bjerraateeye (away) V Mr. Rolz-Bennett i/Mr. Korle no M-.-de-SeyHes i/Mr. Hamid j/Mr. Muller 17 cc: Mr. Korle George H H- ' I1 tt> i Co I? < tir. * * L F.T /N p^vt::F";i'''^ 0r^^i:.^';:'^f*!;:":v«r'.^"Jwdoia» '«f 8*8.' my.1H43iBS3' Hil p aaasnssaart,, )?rtoa Mtoigtsy of Oeraaas-k R^;S:;MIi ( &&$^f1 ; £ • •:.'/;1I ;. ; ;r.V^V^'Vfltt.»« ^rtjfluar,E ' IT ,4&t£Li&& -'•.'....••-••••>- fi:f,^::;v^i•;•Ui ,^',*•':i^;•1^:^^': 5to' :-'!rr-^.l- -M. ;, 'A,;:';:;;^'!.,;..: ,•/,..•,-... . - . ,•:..,,„, .-..., • ...... ,,. :- PiiiiisssmM^y^'tt^ ^ ;•#*•«•'.•;•:,•'•'••:;'.;•'••.••''.•,.: v ; : ! : jpl' ^'^|i^p^S.i ';;. ;;;''' v'^^« ;JB?f:ys«toiJ!;:l^.; H^m ;-y». Karag'li!b,an:y:Karaslajl . : :v:^,V; ';';;••' '-'X .-...' ;::","':;:'• ;3S'..Mrr HofSsaa • >:,| : j; ss- 'i!»E* .Ms?* ,§gbu; • ^ V'."'.':'' :-v4S i •'•.:'•-'•''.. V" .T7:1 ••'..' .1.:;v^:;i-'"••'Jl'- -:' ". • ."":'••''.•."•'-•'•: •• • '.. ** •*»«**» »«* o KJCWiti^iSi .:•.,;• ' . ' •••••';. pifcj;^:;^:!^^;^^ '-/'VyVv/,/-'^;^ ; :: ; : ;i : i; ; ;: l 1: v v v »"'l4?- ^'' ^ii«' ^ T4tevi<»«rt»Mrt**4^^-''' ^K''"-^"''.-'.-'' v"" ^^ H ^'^ .-' ^Ti'i/ V../•\'.\.v;.::.; \ \''j!^;.;;,;i;..'.,,'v, ';. .••••!.,. '__ ' •'''' ••''•' ' ' '"'• ''••'*• ,•••' / ;.; ':,'. !'':.; W'3a plf^rSMSwSj-^Kftr^SSBS^^^gSSs'™^'i;l Vi','( ' < «•'• .,.^'"V'''''.!'''•'••j(''-'.''^-.';''"''''' '^' •••"ViX-"''"'•.'••.'"'.'!' '• ; . 2£' ^hQ_B_SgT€$'tiSKF^MI@^S2^1 '':"''' • •"' • 'f Mtti-^^ti^ ' ..' • ^,::-?l''•^^.•'. ''."••< l< • • ....^-^-^^^^-^^^ .V-:'--:'.::| iifM;^ ,-• ^!&^^ tel|i$Si:!SSte^ • ^«:?5i •ii^^S:^^^^S.:^S^fr:^-r^ pfSi^«ij^^ •yW:f'!^^^:&K te^li^^^^^^^^ • •'-^^;:i:^r.s:ari4^:h^.;^^ Ifeil^ 'v^v^iH^^Cr^^.^^y pfellplf^l1^^!^^^ ^^l•!f^f'•:C^^';^ii;''^^:;'rvi iiliB®^^iiiSJ-!i!fe ' ';;'';||f|i|'f;;;t| •' ^:f: ^^d'S;i^V'5 I-•':;:,'^^^''''•''"• '^ '^^'' •'"'''flvVr •:^$!$^'^''^^|^$1* ; ! 1 1 ' ';;.'(.*:•'; ,:''.,. Pf'-fi' ''' ';> '•'l ''' ^i '' f'' ''• '.''" ' " ^ •' '''V f '' ' '''••'' '- ' 'i . "' ' '^•i'' '? \ ,' '•'''•'''• ••'•''-^ ''' fi''''-' '*'"*'' '-j'''* '?^ '» ,i -, ' . -IT, ; ; : ; ] '•' '•• ;^. '- t . ,:;'.:'A' 4;:'-ill^l;:4'::-'-::'".-r;^ 23 PROGRAMME FOB THS VISIT OF HoS. MR. HXIMAR HOME MINISTER OF DEKMABK TO THE UNXXED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS ON FRXG&Y, IT APRIL 1970 HoE0 M^o Hitear p will arrit® at the laist® will te &®t "£$• the Chief wh© will »** 12: 0:0. feist will Is th© Prime Mi»ister aad t-h® CSslsf ocf Ps®ts«se©l will UNITED NATIONS Press Services ' Office of Public Information United Nations, N.Y. (FOR USE OF INFORMATION MEDIA •— NOT AN OFFICIAL RECORD) Note No, 3600 15 April 19TO NOTE TO CORRESPONDENTS The Prime Minister of Denmark, Hilmar BaunsgaarcL will pay an official visit to United Nations Headquarters on Friday, 17 April, and will be guest of honour at a luncheon given by the'Secretary-General, U Thant. The Prime Minister will arrive at the Secretariat entrance at 12:UO p.m., accompanied by Otto Borch, Permanent Representative of Denmark to the United Nations; Paul Fischer, the Permanent Under-Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Eigil Joergensen, the Permanent Under-Secretary of the Prime Minister's Office, and Skjold Mellbin, Deputy Permanent Representative of Denmark, The Prime Minister and his party will be met at the entrance by the United Nations Chief of Protocol, Sinan A. Korle, and will be met by the Secretary-General on the thirty-eight floor. The two officials will hold a private conversation in the Secretary-General's office. At 1:30 p.m.,, luncheon will be served to the Prime Minister and his party in the Secretary-General's thirty-eighth floor conference room. After the luncheon, the Prime Minister and his party will leave Headquarters from the Secretariat entrance at 2:^5 P-.JH. ;v.,y..V.' * A T\T A H.J t-. • ft- I ij HV i H ft) & fri .»;V! SECRETARIAT MEWS, Jtiday, 15 May 1970 MAESTRO PABLO CASALS AND MRS. CASALS visited Headquarters on 17 April to attend a reception given in their honour by the Secretary-General. The occasion was "Salud Casals" a benefit concert in which the Maestro conducted 100 celli in his own composition "La Sardana" at Philharmonic Hall; the UN International School and the American Symphony Orchestra's free concerts for children were the beneficiaries. On the same day, Dr. and Mrs. Murray Fuhrman (Mrs. Fuhrman is a member of the School's Board of Trustees) gave a luncheon for the Casals. Among the guests were Miss Julia Henderson, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of UNIS; Mr. R. K. Basu, Secretary of the Board; Mr. Desmond Cole, Director, UNIS; Mr. Leonardo Balada, Head of the UNIS Music Department; Mr. and Mrs. Albert Kahn (Mr. Kahn is the co-author of "Joys and Sor- rows"); Mrs. Arthur Smadtaeck, President of the Heckscher Foundation for Children; Mrs. John Loeb, NYC Commissioner to the UN. The photo at the left was taken prior to the luncheon. The one at the right was tak- en on the 38th floor; in the foreground, from the left, are: Maestro Casals, Mrs. Casals, UThant and Maes- tro Leopold Stokowski, Founder and Director of the American Symphony Orchestra. At the reception, Maestro Casals said: "It is for me a great pleasure and honour to be once more at the United Nations and in the company of my dear friend, Secretary-General Thant and his most esteemed col- leagues. I have long believed that the United Nations represents the most important hope for peace on our troubled earth. I am sorrowfully mindful of the agonies that men and women and children are suffering in the jungles and villages of Viet-Nam and in the tortured areas of the Near East and in other parts of the world. I am conscious of the hunger, oppression and tyranny that continue to torment every continent. I grieve over the fact that, like savages, we fear our neighbours and that we arm against them and they arm against us. If we are to become accustomed to the fact that we are human beings, if we are to make meaningful the know- ledge that love should not stop at the border, then indeed it is through the United Nations that we of all lands must act together to achieve a world in which we and our children will live in harmony and happiness. "The thought of children in all their beauty and innocence is constantly with me, and it has had a special significance for me these last few days. The concert and exhibition with which I have been associated here in New York City have had as their goal the rendering of aid to the United Nations International School and to a series of free concerts for children. What nobler purpose could there by than that of bringing learning and music - and therefore joy - to many children of many nations. Children and young people are our greatest treasure. When we speak of them we speak of the future of the world. Together with the people of all lands *we niust work to protect that common treasure. And more than that. We must nurture that richness. April 30, 1970, His Excellency U Thant Secretary General United Nations lew York, New York. Dear Mr. Secretary General, Please excuse my delay in thanking you for the great honor you made me in offering me the friend- ly reception at the United Nations on April 17th. It was a memorable occasion that has meant so much to me i Your generous words - which I do not pretend to de serve- moved me deeply; but most of all I am grateful for the friendship you have shown me. These enlightening encoun- ters with great men, as you, make me feel, even more, my responsibility towards my fellow men. followed your important activities throughout these years with great admiration. Your depth of insight, your discipline and dedication, your spirit and integrity and your concern for human dignity have always been evident in your leadership of the United Nations. Please accept my heartiest wishes and my affection. May God Bless you \ In high esteem, Pablo Casals Kis Bcelleiicy U That Secretary General The United 'Nations Few Y@rk, W. Y. PABL.O ISLA VERDE K2 HS SANT-URCE. PUERTO RICO UNITED NATIONS Press Services Office of Public Information United Nations, N.I. (FOR USE OF INFORMATION MEDIA — WOT AN OFFICIAL RECORD) Press Release M/18U2 17 April 1970 STATEMENT BY PABLO CASALS AT RECEPTION GIVEN BY SECRETARY-GENERAL Following is the text of a statement made by Pablo Casals at a reception given by the Secretary-General, U Thant, in his suite on the 38th floor of United Nations Headquarters at 11:50 a.m. on 17 April: It is for me a great pleasure and honour to be once more at the United Nations and in the company of my dear friend, Secretary-General Thant and his most esteemed colleagues. I have long believed that the United Nations represents the most important hope for peace on our troubled earth. I am sorrowfully mindful of the agonies that men and women and children are suffering in the jungles and villages of Viet-Nam and in the tortured areas of the Near East and in other parts of the world. I am conscious of the hunger, oppression and tyranny that continue to torment every continent. I grieve over the fact that, like savages, we fear our neighbours and that we arm against them and they arm against us. If we are to become accustomed to the fact that we are human beings, if we are to make meaningful the knowledge that love should not stop at the border, then indeed it is through the United Nations that we of all lands must act together to achieve a world in which we and our children will live in harmony and happiness. The thought of children in all their beauty and innocence is constantly with me, and it has had a special significance for me these last few days. The concert and exhibition with which I have been associated here in New York City have had as their goal the rendering of aid to the United Nations Inter- national School and to a series of free concerts for children. What nobler purpose could there be than that of bringing learning and music -- and therefore joy — to many children of many nations. Children and young people are our greatest treasure » When we speak of them we speak of the future of the world. (more) Press Release M/1842 17 April 1970 Together with the people of all lands we must work to protect that common treasure. And more than that. We must nurture that richness. In the book that I have recently concluded, Joys and Sorrows, I have expressed my feelings in these words: "Each second we live in a new and unique moment of the universe, a moment that never was before and will never be again.. And what do we teach our children in school? We teach them that two and two make four, and that Paris is the capital of France. When will we also teach them what they are? We should say to each of them: Do you know what you are? You are a marvel. You are unique. In all of the world there is no other child exactly like you. In the millions of years that have passed there has never been another child like you. And look at your body — what a wonder it is', your legs, your arms, your cunning fingers, the way you movel You may become a Shakespeare, a Michelangelo, a Beethoven. You have the capacity for anything. Yes, you are a marvel. And when you grow up, can you then harm another who is, like you, a marvel? You must cherish •one another. You must work -- we all must work -- to make this world worthy of its children." * •*•** * UNITED NATIONS Press Services Office of Public Information United Nations, N.Y. (FOR USE OF INFORMATION MEDIA — NOT AN OFFICIAL RECORD) Press Release 17 April 1970 STATEMENT BY PABLO CASALS AT RECEPTION GIVEN BY SECRETARY-GENERAL Following is the text of a statement made by Pablo Casals at a reception given by the Secretary-General, U Thant, in his suite on the 38th floor of • United Nations Headquarters at 11:30 a.m. on 17 April: It is for me a great pleasure and honour to be once more at the United Nations and in the company of my dear friend, Secretary-General Thant and his most esteemed colleagues. I have long believed that the United Nations represents the most important hope for pence on our troubled earth. I am sorrowfully mindful of the agonies that men and women and children are suffering in the jungles and villages of Viet-Nam and in the tortured areas of the Near East and in other parts of the world. I am conscious of the hunger, oppression and tyranny that continue to torment every continent. I grieve over the fact that, like savages, we fear our neighbours and that we arm against them and they arm against ua. If we are to become accustomed to the fact that we are human beings, if we are to make meaningful the knowledge that love should not stop at the border, then indeed it is through the United Nations that we of all lands must act together to achieve a world in which we and our children will live in harmony and happiness. The thought of children in all their beauty and innocence is constantly with me, and it has had a special significance for me these last few days. The concert and exhibition with which I have been associated here in New York City have had as their goal the rendering of aid to the United Nations Inter- national School and to a series of free concerts for children. What nobler purpose could there be than that of bringing learning and music — and therefore joy -- to many children of many nations. Children and young people are our greatest treasure. When we speak of them we speak of the future of the world. (more) * - 2 - Press Release M/1842 ) 1? April 1970 •H-; Together with the people of all lands we must work to protect that common treasure. And more than that. We must nurture that richness. In the book that I have recently concluded, Joys and Sorrows, I have expressed my feelings in these words: "Each second we live in a new and unique moment of the universe, a moment that never was "before and will never be again*. And what do we teach our children in school? We teach them that two and two make four, and that Paris is the capital of France. When will we also teach them what they are? We should say to each of them: Do you know what you are? You are a marvel. You are unique. In all of the world there is no other child exactly like you. In the millions of years that have passed there has never been another child like you. And look at your body — what a wonder it is I your legs, your arms, your cunning fingers, the way you moveL You may become a Shakespeare, a Michelangelo, a Beethoven. You have the capacity for anything. Yes, you are a marvel. And when you grow up, can you then harm another who is, like you, a marvel? You must cherish . jpne another, You must work --we all must work — to make this world worthy of its children." •UNITED NATIONS Press Services Office of Public Information United Nations, N.I. (FOR USE OF INFORMATION MEDIA -- NOT AN OFFICIAL RECORD) Press Release M/18^-2 17 April 1970 • STATEMENT BY PABLO CASALS AT RECEPTION GIVEN BY SECRETARY-GENERAL Following is the text of a statement made by Pablo Casals at a reception given by the Secretary-General, U Thant, in his suite on the 38th floor of United Nations Headquarters at 11:30. a.m. on, 17 April: It is for me a great pleasure and hemoar t$ be once more at the United Nations and in the company of my dear friend, Secretary-General Thant and his most esteemed colleagues. I have long believed that the United Nations represents the most important hope for peace on our troubled earth. I am sorrowfully mindful of the agonies that men and women and children are suffering in the jungles and villages of Viet-Nam and in the tortured areas of the Near East and in other parts of the world. I am conscious of the hunger, oppression and tyranny that continue to torment every continent. I grieve over the fact that, like savages, we fear our neighbours and that we arm against them and they arm against us. If we are to become accustomed to the fact that we are human beings, if we are to make meaningful the knowledge that love should not stop at the border, then indeed it is through the United Nations that we of all lands must act together to achieve a world in which we and our children will live in harmony and happiness. The thought of children in all their beauty and innocence is constantly with me, and it has had a special significance for me these last few days. The concert and exhibition with which I have been associated here in New York City have had as their goal the rendering of aid to the United Nations Inter- national School and to a series of free concerts for children. What nobler purpose could there be than that of bringing learning and music -- and therefore joy -- to many children of many nations. Children and young people are our greatest treasure. When we speak of them we spqak of the future of the world. (more) - 2 - Press Release 17 April 1970 Together with the people of all lands we must work to protect that common treasure. And more than that. We must nurture that richness. In the book that I have recently concluded. Joys and Sorrows, I have expressed my feelings in these words: "Each second we live in a new and unique moment of the universe, a moment that never was before and will never be again,. And what do we teach our children in school? We teach them that two and two make four, and that Paris is the capital of France. When will we also teach them what they are?- We should say to each of them: Do you know what you are? You are a marvel. You are unique. In all of the world there is no other child exactly like you. In the millions of years that have passed there has never been another child like you. And look at your body -- what a wonder it isI your legs, your arms, your cunning fingers, the way you move! You may become a Shakespeare, a Michelangelo, a Beethoven. You have the capacity for anything. Yes, you are a rtarvel. And when you grow up, can you then harm another who is, like you, a marvel? You must cherish one another. You must work -- we all must work -- to make this world worthy of its children." * -X--X-X- * UNITED NATIONS |||| NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR TO: Mr. L. Lemieux PATE= 8 April 197Q Office of the Secretary-General REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: FROM: Mrs. Murray Fuhrman, Member Board of Trustees, UWIS SUBJECT: Reception for Pablo Casals. ET: 17th April, 11:30 aTm The attached list of guests to he invited to the Reception honouring Pahlo Casals is incomplete. However, Mr. Narasimhan suggested these invitations be sent now. When Maestro Casals gives me his personal list, I will immediately forward it to you. LIST FOR SECRETARY-GENERAL'S RECEPTION FOR PABLO CASALS, 17th APRIL, 11:30 a.m. 38th floor UNIS Board of Trustees: Miss Julia Henderson, UN, Room 2527 . Bruce R. Turner, UN, Room 372? I/Mr. A. A. Stark, UN, Room 3721 j/Mr. R. K. Basu, UN, Room 25% r/Mr.. Karl EiiL ILuiobUiL, UN,' Ruum 232^ fa**V) /Dr. Paulina B. Fernandez: 73 -27 178th St., Fresh Meadows, Queens 11366 -. M. A , Permanent Rep 4 E. 79th St. New York, N.Y. 10021 * H.E. Dr. Wahbi El-Bouri, Permanent Representative of Libya to the U.N. 866 United Nations Plaza New York, H. Y. 10017 799 United Nations Plaza Nev York, N. Y. 10017 W. H. Ziehl Lions 799 United ib Plaza , N. Y. 10017 jln 'i'auruokd,, reiiiujiGnt ncpixacuLeiLivb 61 Japan LU Lhe—y^JJ. 866 United Nations Plaza, 2nd floor New York, N. Y. 10017 Hon. Mr. Tore Tallroth, Consul General of Sweden 6l E. 6kth St. New York, N. Y. 10021 I/ H.E. Mr. Eugeniusz Ku^'aga, Permanent Representative of the Polish People's Republic to the United Nations 9 East 66th St. New York, N. Y. 10021 I/Mr. William ¥, Cox, UN, Room 809 i . .Xflri Pcra! Guy Gresford, UN, Room 3?27 . Derek Lovejoy: 166-04 8lst Avenue, Jamaica, N. Y. ,/jyir. Abraham Tamir, UN, Room 5^6 Mr- Desmond Cole, Director, UNIS New York, N. Y. 10022 (continued) TOTAL; 87 SG reception 17 April 1970 2. ./Mr. and Mrs. Jpea I. Berson V Mr. and Mrs-^Reed Rubin T l80 East End/avenue 135 Centpal Park West /* New York, ^T; Y, 10028 New Yjei% N. Y, 10023 . and Mrs. Richard Coulson Miss Christine Donovan Park Avenue 205 E. 77th Street New York, N. Y. 10028 New York, N. Y. 10021 j/Mrs. Cornelius Crane Maestro Leopold Stokowski 9 East 79th Street 1067 Fifth Avenue New York, N. Y. 10021 New York, N. Y. 10028 Mr. and Mrs-xSamuel Rufoin \/Mr. and Mrs. Arthur Hendrick //O I/ ^639 Kenmore Drive DM 9 East 6Jj#f Street Washington, D. C. New Yo^T N. Y. 10021 f ^/ Mrs. Jane Bagley Lehman Dr. and Mrs. Murray Fuhrman 9^-1 Park Avenue 115-18 Mayfair Road New York, N. Y. 10028 Kew Gardens, N. Y. •. and Mrs. David Tishman . /Mr. Alvin Bernstein 930 Fifth Avenue Sperry & Hutch,inson Foundation Inc. New York, N.Y. 10028 The Sperry &XHutchinson Bldg. /\j 0 330 Madispn Avenue -/Mr. Stewart^Mott New YorJ< N. Y. 10017 800 Park/Avenue New ?k, N. Y. 10021 ,/Mr. and Mrs. Hans von Brockhusen 300 East 33rd Street ,/Mr. and Mrs. Ralph E. Ah Ion Apartment l^J 778 Park Avenue New York, N.Y. 100l6 Hew York, N. Y. 10021 r.°and Mrs. Arthur Smadbeck • /Mrs. Werner Jjen^ten 52 Vanderbilt Avenue 9H Fif th/Avenue New York, N.Y. 10017 New 1o^ N. Y. 10021 i/Mr. and Mrs. C. Carter Walker, Jr. 925 Park Avenue New York, N. Y. 10028 . and Mrs. Edwin Thorne, Jr. 1100 Park Avenue (continued) New York, N. Y. 10028 - 3 - SG reception 17 April 1970 IMDER/ASSISTASiT SECRETARIES-GENERAL: /Vo , /Dr . Bunche /Mr. Myer Cohen Rajendra Coomaraswamy . Djermakoye . Gherab r. Hamid t/M. Paul -Marc Henry . Hoffman . Kutakov ,/Mr. Labouisse t/Mr. Warasimhan Wosek /l/o '^/far Stavropoulos Turner ,/Mr. Vaughan 38th FLOOR; Mr. Lessiovski . Muller Hie Secretary-General sit. i/Miss Angle E. Brooks (Roger Smith Hotel, Lexington Avenue at 47th Street) I/Mr. William Powell y/yMr. Ramses Hassif •/Mr. William Oatis, President of UNCA (continued) - k - LIST FOR SECRETARY-GENERAL'S RECEPTION - 11:30 A.M., 17 APRIL 1970 GUESTS OF PABLO CASALS (to be distributed by Mrs. Casals via Mrs. Fuhrman); Maestro and Mrs. Pablo Casals Dr. and Mrs. Jorge Acevedo Dr. and Mrs. Carlos Collignon Mr. and Mrs. Ricardo Betancourt r. and Mrs. Louis Cueto Coll Mr. and Mrs. Achilles Montenez Mr. and Mrs. Enrico Jimeno Miss Nora Press Mr. Bartolome Bover (probably will not come) Mr. and Mrs. Albert Kahn Mrs. Isaac Stern j^ John LQ^ (to be mailed): , /Mr. Eugene Isotomin Mayflower Hotel • Central Park West and 6lst Street New York, N. Y. \-^~^ - ^/Dr. and Mrs. Luis Munoz Marin 23 Pine Drive Roosevelt, New Jersey £f'**"h'"'/'o I// Mr- ant^ Mrs« Maurice Eisenberg 13 Cypress Street Milburn, New Jersey /Miss Millie Stamfield 13 Cypress Street Milburn., New Jersey Mr. and Mrs. Herbert Kirk 233 East 69th Street New York, N. Y. 10021 Miss Cathy F^ / , w 179 ¥est Chiton Avenue / New Jersey 62450 2? f r»y 57 7 1s etat yards h3 ssnturee 00913 -•ngny t? anks your telstjr^te 31 aarcb. :i n« wdvancivig t i"© of reception to t1.?0 a.w. on !7 fn-ril to give wfi ••or^ ti.r'e t f>ope tMa is convenient, took fofw^r,: to r^csivlnv y ;u 17 -.. tharu s^ col K2«h3 00913 31 It. 30 1? i?* RCA -POSH IS ZC2C PTBS952 MS037I POYOJ97 500109 Hi FTSJ 050 50 ao SIOP« ft SECTSTA^Y GEMERA! U CATIONS NEWYORX8Y SFEftTLY HONORED BY YOUR IKVIYATIQS 0« AP1RIL 17TH 1 GRATEFULLY PT LOOKUP FORWARD TC BEtNG WITH YC5U AGA!« CORDIALLY YC-OTS PABLO CASALS COIL IT I7TH RCA POSH 13 ® UUATIOS 2284S2/RDCS/KE ZCZC PT«5932'R«B037l POY0397 30010$ 222*22 HRPH Jit PTSJ 0-30 30 30 6tOP« LT SECRETARY GENERAL U THABT U»ITED 8AT 10MS SEWYORKMY j GREATLY HONORED BY YOUR INVITATION OH APRIL I7TH I GRATEFULLY LQOKXMG FORWARD TO 3EIRG WITH YOU AGAIN' CORDIALLY YOURS PABLO- CASAtS C O COLL LT I7TK fVN/CC cc: Mr. Narasimhan Mr. Lemieux 20 March 1970 Dear Mr. Schwed, Thank you for your very Mad letter of March 17- I am most grateful to you for your thoughtfulaess in sending me an advance copy of Pablo Casals* book "Joys and Sorrows". I am looking forward to treading it with the greatest interest. I am also hoping to be able to receive Maitre Casals at the United Nations onjjE--April» With kind regards. Yours sincerely* Thant Hr. Peter Schwed Publisher Simon and Schuster Hoekefeller Center 6^0 Fifth Aveime New York, S.I. 10020 SIMON AND SCHUSTER PETER SCHWED PUBLISHER • Rockefeller Center, 630 Fifth Avenue New York, N.Y. 10020 Telephone 212 Circle 5-6400 March 17, 1970 Honorable U Thant Secretary-General United Nations United Nations Headquarters New York, New York 10017 Dear Mr. Thant: At the suggestion of Leopold Stokowski, I am sending you the accompanying advance copy of Pablo Casals' book, JOYS AND SORROWS. As one of the sponsors of the approaching Salud Casals Concert — one purpose of which is, as you know, to commemorate the publication of Casals' first book - I think you will find it of special- interest. I might say that we at Simon and Schuster are particularly proud to be the publishers of this book. We'd very much appreciate hearing from you about the book if you care to give us a quote. s Sincerely yours, PS:jdfa enc. It Is tk&t I 3»st$ fmm & to- ia ia I are Jfci-oits* It i© os 15 Asiisll, ft Id a gesat fi^- ttet I ^Cll myfe to &i&3ssi& t^U e«3«t«1j ss I &asfe e-te a cc - Mrv Sr, Stark Mrs* 4 *: ' ^ *'* " .' ' CW/nt ' :* Mrs* Murray Fuhrman, Member 6 March 1970 Board of Trustees* Kr, Anotfew A, Stark, for Aflmittlstration an<3 Maaagement C* V. Hara^inihan, Ofeef <3e Cabinet for ,| 2he Secretarjr-Oeneral gladly accepts the I postponement of the reception for Maestro Casals to 17 April. % shall be writing to Jfasetro Casals shortly -afith a copy to you* Mr, Lemiexix c; ' UNITED NATIONS NAT IONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM 1NTERIEUR TO: Mr. C. Vo Narasimhan DATE: 5_March 1970 A: Chef de Cabinet REFERENCE: THROUGH: Mr. Andrew A. Stark, er^Secretary-General for Administration and Management FROM.-- Sylvia Howard Fuhrman, Member Board of Trustees, UNIS SUBJECT: Reception for Pablo Casals. OB JET: - - " It was kind of you indeed to intercede on behalf of the United Nations International School in requesting the Secretary-General to invite Maestro Casals to a reception on 16 April. I was informed a few minutes ago that the Maestro's physician forbids him to attend so soon after his performance late the night before. Maestro Casals therefore has respectfully requested that the reception be held at noon the following day, 17 April, If that in possible, he will be most pleased to change his plans and remain in New York an additional day. If the change of date is suitable, we gratefully accept your gracious offer to arrange for a formal invitation from the Secretary-General to Maestro Casals. '• » V-"——_-. — ^ -—*^-., . .. fy \ * v*-, * CV^/nt Mrs« . Murra«. y Fuhrma». u n ** March 1970 Development Office, UNIS Mr. Andrew A. Stark, Under-Secretary-Oeneral for Administration and Management . C. V. Naraslmhan Cy° ^-i ' Chef de Cabinet Reception for Pablo Casals With regard to your memorandum dated 2b February on the above subject, the Secretary-General would be delighted to offer Maestro Casals a champagne reception on the thirty-eighth floor at jj? noon on Thursday 16 April. I hope that this will be convenient to the If it is your wish that the Secretary-General should address a formal invitation to Maestro Casals,, I shall be glad to arrange for this. cc - Hlse Henderson Mr. Lemleux TJNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM INTERIEUR r. 24 February 1970 Mr. C. V. Narasimhan, Chef de Cabinet REFERENCE: THROUGH: ^« *• Stark, Under-Secretary-Greneral s/c DE: for Administration and Management FROM: ltraf Murray Fuhrman Development Office, UNIS Reception for Pablo Casals Thank you so much for your excellent advice when we spoke informally the other day about the "Salud Casals" benefit concert on 15 Aprilo In accordance with your suggestion, would you be good enough to use your good offices to ask the Secretary-General if he would be willing to invite Pablo Casals to a reception in his honour on 16 April at either 12 noon or any other hour that is convenient. It is estimated that there would be approximately fifty guests. Maestro Casals can be reached at: Isle Verde K2-H3 Santurce 00913 San Juan, Puerto Rico Plans for the Benefit evening are proceeding very well indeed. Although the invitations have not yet been sent, there has been much enthusiasm, interest and even some ticket sales* SALUD CASALS Each second we live in a new and unique moment of the universe, a moment that never was before and will never be again. And what do we teach our children in school? We teach them that two and two make four, and that Paris is the capital of France. When will we also teach them what they are? We should say to each of them: Do you know what you are? You are a marvel. You are unique. In all of the world there is no other child exactly like you. In the millions of years that have passed there has never been another child like you. And look at your body—what a wonder it is! your legs, your arms, your cunning fingers, the way you move! You may become a Shakespeare, a Michelangelo, a Beethoven. You have the capacity for anything. Yes, you are a marvel. And when you grow up, can you then harm another who is, like you, a marvel? You must cherish one another. You must work—we all must work—to make this world worthy of its children. from Joys and Sorrows, Reflections by Pablo Casals, as told to Albert E. Kahn (to be published in April 1970) For the benefit of the American Symphony Free Concerts for Children and the United Nations International School Proceeds from your participation in SALUD CASALS mil be shared by the American Symphony Free Concerts for Children and the United Nations International School. They will ensure the continuation of this educational series of free concerts which has reached 325, ooo public school children, and mil enable the United Nations International School to accept many worthy students in need of scholarship assistance. In recognition of Pablo Casals' superlative artistry and uncompromising humanism, we U THANT • LEOPOLD STOKOWSKI ANSEL ADAMS • MARIAN ANDERSON • W. H. AUDEN • ROGER BALDWIN • SAMUEL BARBER SIR JOHN BARBIROLLI -LEONARD BERNSTEIN -EUGENE CARSON BLAKE • NADIA BOULANGER SIR ADRIAN BOULT • ANGIE BROOKS • ROBERT MCAFEE BROWN • RALPH BUNCHE MARC CHAGALL • CHARLES CHAPLIN • SIR KENNETH CLARK • HENRY STEELE COMMAGER AARON COPLAND • NORMAN COUSINS • RALPH ELLISON • FEDERICO FELLINI • LUIS A. FERRE MARGOT FONTEYN • CHRISTOPHER FRY • BUCKMINSTER FULLER • SIR JOHN GIELGUD ROBERT GRAVES • LILLIAN HELLMAN • ABRAHAM HESCHEL • THOR HEYERDAHL MIECZYSLAW HORS2OWSKI • PETER L. KAPITZA • YOUSEF KARSH • ROCKWELL KENT MRS. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. • ARTHUR KOESTLER • JOSEPH WOOD KRUTCH ALICE ROOSEVELT LONGWORTH • ARCHIBALD MACLEISH • NORMAN MAILER LUIS MUNOZ MARIN • PETER MENNIN • YEHUDI MENUHIN • HENRY MOORE ALBERTO MORAVIA • SAMUEL ELIOT MORISON • LEWIS MUMFORD • PABLO NERUDA ALWIN NIKOLAIS • DAVID OISTRAKH • GEORGIA o'KEEFFE • MRS. GEORGE ORWELL GREGOR PIATIGORSKY • JEAN RENOIR • RICHARD RODGERS • ANDRES SEGOVIA ALEXANDER SCHNEIDER • DMITRI SHOSTAKOVICH • C. P. SNOW • EDWARD STEICHEN ISAAC STERN • GEORGE SZELL • VIRGIL THOMSON • JULIO ALVAREZ DEL VAYO • ROY WILKINS cordially invite you to SALUD CASALS A Concert by the American Symphony Orchestra LEOPOLD STOKOWSKI, conducting BEVERLY SILLS, soprano • RUDOLF SERKiN, pianist PROGRAM BEETHOVEN Leonore Overture No. 3 ROSSINI, BELLINI, DONIZETTI Arias Beverly Sills, soprano BACH Toccata and Fugue in D minor BEETHOVEN Piano Concerto No. 5 Rudolf Serkin, pianist CASALS O Vos Omnes CASALS Sardana Maestro Casals has graciously consented to conduct 100 invited 'cellists in this performance thefifteent h of April, nineteen hundred seventy Wednesday evening, eight o'clock Philharmonic Hall, New York PLEASE RESPOND. CARD ENCLOSED BLACK TIE SUGGESTED "Friends of Pablo Casals" Mr. & Mrs. Ralph E. AUon Mr. & Mrs. Skitch Henderson Mr. Stewart R. Mott Mr. & Mrs. Joel I. Berson Mrs. Arthur Hendrick Mrs. Aristotle Onassis Mr. & Mrs. Richard Coulson Mrs. Edward M. Kennedy Mr. & Mrs. Samuel Rubin Mrs. Cornelius Crane Mr. & Mrs. John E. Kilgore, Jr. Mr. & Mrs. Jack Rudin Mrs. Henry Ford II Mrs. Albert D. Lasker Mr. & Mrs. DavidTishman Dr. & Mrs. Murray Fuhrman Mrs. Jane Baglej Lehman Miss Alice Tully Mrs. Lydia Bickford Mrs. Rash Kress Mr. & Mrs. James M. C. Ritchie Mr. & Mrs. James H. Blauvelt Mr. & Mrs. Robert A. Lehman Mrs. James Roosevelt Mrs. William T. Copper Mr. &Mrs. W. Barnabas McHenry Mrs. Milton H. Rubin Arnold de Vignier Copper Mrs. Carl Maas Mr. Edgar Stern Mrs. Georgina D. Childs Mr. S. Herbert Meller Mrs. Angela Storke Mrs. Zita Davisson Dr. & Airs. George Naumburg, Jr. Mr. & Mrs. John Strong Princess Diane R. Eristavi Mrs. Patricia Norris Mr. & Mrs. Edward Tishman Mr. & Mrs. Norris Harkness Mr. & Mrs. Albert Otten Mrs. Hans von Brockhusen Hon. & Mrs. August Heckscher Mr. & Mrs. Wingate Paine Mr. & Mrs. George Washburn Mr. & Mrs. Hans Hoffmann Mrs. Dorothy Parker Mr. & Mrs. Stanley Weintraub Mrs. Werner Josten Mr. Max Reibeisen Dr. & Mrs. Franklin H. Williams Mr. & Mrs. Harvey Karp Mrs. H. D. Rhodes Mr.&Mrs.E.W.Kelley Mr. & Mrs. George Richard 'Young Friends of Pablo Casals' Mr. & Mrs. C. Carter Walker, Jr. • Mr. & Mrs. Edwin Thorne, Jr. • Mr. & Mrs. Reed Rubin Mr. & Mrs. RaymondBeech,Jr. Mr. & Mrs. Robert Bruce Gimbel Mr. & Mrs. HalB. Howard Mr. & Mrs. Donald A. E. Beer Mrs. James L. Goldman Mr. & Mrs. Alexis Ladas Mr. & Mrs. Charles S. Bullock, Jr. Mr. Charles Livingston Grimes Mr. & Mrs. Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. Mr. & Mrs. William T. Comfort Dr. & Mrs. William Hamilton Mr. & Mrs. A. Albert Sack Miss Christine Donovan Mr. & Mrs. James Harpel The exhibition, "Century of Casals," at The Juilliard School will mark the establishment of a collection of memorabilia concerning Maestro Casals and photographs of Casals by Albert E. Kahn. SALUD CASALS Donors and Patrons will be invited to the opening of the exhibition and a reception in honor of Pablo Casals immediately following the concert. SALUD CASALS 200 West ;jth Street, Suite 1408, New York, N.Y. 10019 tel.: (212) 581-1640 SALUD CASALS 200 West 57th Street Suite 1408 New York, N.Y. 10019 SALUD CASALS A Benefit for the American Symphony Free Concerts for Children and the United Nations International School Wednesday evening, April ij, 1970 at 8:oo, Philharmonic Hall Please accept my order for: Number Total Tax Deductible Box Office of Seats Benefit Price Contribution Price Orchestra; Loge Arms $125.00 $115.00 Sio.oo Orchestra; Loge; I st Terrace Arms 75.00 67.50 7.50 Orchestra; Loge; ist Terrace 50.00 44.00 6.00 Orchestra; ist Terrace; 2nd Terrace Arms 25.00 20.00 5.00 Preferred location Second choiclice I enclose my check in the amount of $ Name Address City State Zip Telephone D I cannot attend, but wish to support Salud Casals. I enclose my contribution of $ (tax deductible) Seats will be allocated in the order in which reservations are received. Kindly make checks payable to SALUD CASALS and enclose a self-addressed stamped envelope with your order. SALUD CASALS 200 Wejfi^ Street, Suite 1408, New York, N.Y. 10019 ft/. (212) 581-1640 <*£ "f feffi H (DC o'&,i 8§ gFte 1»:J P £-! 19 March 1970 Reception given by the Secretary-General on Monday, 6 April 1970* at 5 p.m., 38th floor (/c^_^r l/RiRisuke Hayashi Asahi Shimbun 98-30 57th Avenue Apt. 4-L Lefrak City, N.Y. 11368 Tel: 271-5433 Toyo Tanaka Asahi Shimbun 104-40 Queens Boulevard Apt. 2-D Forest Hills, N.Y. Chuichi Yone Jiji Tsushin Beaux Arts Hotel Room K-South 310 East 44th Street New York, N.Y. 10017 Tel: MU9-3800 Kuniji Oguro Jiji Tsushin c/o Jiji Press 660 First Avenue New York, N.Y. 10016 Tel: MU4-2580 / Michiomi Suwabe Kyodo Tsushin 133-22 Blossom Avenue Flushing, N.Y. 11355 Tel: 762-0033 Ichiro Saida Kyodo Tsushin Room 522 Associated Press Building Rockefeller Plaza New York, N.Y. 10020 Tel: JU6-0152 Isao Hirano Mainichi Shimbun 46-22 Union Street Flushing, N.Y. 11355 Tel: 762-4333 Hajime Seki Mainichi Shimbun 100 River Road Cos Cob, Conn. 0680? Tel: (203)661-4565 Hisao Yoshimura Nihon Keizai Shimbun 53-11 90th Street Apt. 7H Elmhurst, N.Y. 11373 Tel: 592-7661 Sho Onodera Sankei Shimbun 605 West lllth Street Nihon Kogyo Shimbun New York, N.Y. 10025 Tel: UN5-8904 TOTAL:. - 2 - Shinsuke Yoshiraura Tokyo Shimbun 144-70 41st Avenue Chubu Nippon Shimbun Apt. IK Flushing, N.Y. 11355 Tel: 353-5197 Akitaka Hirata Yomiuri Shimbun 51-33 Codwise Place Elmhurst, N.Y. 11373 Tel: 457-S969 Tatsuji Ogane Yomiuri Shimbun Room 532 50 Rockefeller Plaza New York, N.Y. 10020 Tel: JU2-582? Koji Yagi Chubu Nippon Hoso Room 8-K 225 East 63rd Street New York, N.Y. 10021 Tel: 593-1822 Motoyuki Ariizumi Fuji Telecasting Co. 57-22 Van Doren Street Corona, New York 11368 Tel: 592-3582 sushi Nagatsuma. Mainichi Broadcasting 61-10 Alderton Street System Rego Park, N.Y. 11374 Tel: 478-7805 Kin yuyu. Takauaijlii Mainichi Broadcasting 41-6? Judge Street System Elmhurst, N.Y. 11373 Tel: 672-4092 azuto Yoshida N.H.K. Room 350 Graybar Building 420 Lexington Avenue New York, N.Y. 10017 Tel: MJ 2-6280 Takashi Suetsune N.H.K. 108-50 62nd Drive Apt. 2B North Forest Hills, N.Y. 11375 Tel: 275-8821 i' Hiyochi- N.E.T. Television 420 East 72nd Street New York, N.Y. 10021 Tel: 249-9273 Kazuo Gomi Nippon Television 500 East 77th Street Network Corp (NTV) Apt. 3115 New York, N.Y. 10021 Tel: 249-7U5 — 3 — TacLayuki Matsumura Nippon Television 370 East ?6th Street Network Corp (NTV) Apt. B-306 New York, N.Y. 10021 Tel: 249-1950 Yasuo Aomi Tokyo Hoso 102-30 66th Road Apt. 24D Forest Hills, N.Y. 11375 Tel: 897-7357 Hideo Masuko Tokyo Hoso East 73rd Street Apt. 10-B New York , N.Y. 10021 Tel: 861-8176 Philippine Correspondent Libertito Pelayo Manila Times 83-45 Vietor Avenue Arahurst, N.Y. 11373 Permanent Mission of the Philippines j/ H.E. Mr. Privado G. Jimenez, Deputy Permanent Representative 0,, .\/H.E. Mr.i EnfliJjQ.>I). Be.ja.sai. Deputy Permanent Representative ^/Mr. Alejandro D. Yango, Minister , /Mr. Iluminado G. Torres, Minister Permanent Mission of Japan; no i/HrB no i/ H-rET-MrT-Isae-Abejr-Bepnty-Permanent-Representative- (in Geneva) i / Mr. Takeshi Naito, Counsellor ^/ Mr. Hideo Kagami, Counsellor Mr. Wagao Yoshida, Minister The Honourable Pacifico Evangelista, Consul General of the Philippines (15 E. 66th St.] The Honourable Hiroshi Ushida, Consul General of Japan (235 East 42nd Street) /.*••« - 4 - Bie Secretary-General y Dr . Bunche v/'Mr. Rolz -Bennett y Mr. Narasimhan \/Mr. Urquhart \/Mr. Muller i/ Mr . Le s si o vski V/Mrs. Bautista no . Hamid . d'Arcy no trT-ebhrai (away) i/ Mr . Pavli che nko i/Mr. Powell . Nassif . Ortiz-Tinoco . Oatis (President of UNCA) UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM 1NTERIEUR TO: Mr. C.V. Warasimhan DATE: 19 March 1970 A: Chef de Cabinet REFERENCE: THROUGH: S/C DE: FROM: Y. Akashi OE: SUBJECT: Reception in connexion with the Secretary-General's OBJET: visit to the Far East _ -->6- Please find attached a list of the names of Japanese correspondents as well as that of a Philippine correspondent residing in New York who might be invited to the reception to be given by the Secretary-General on 6 April at 5.00 p.m. In realit6-- y there is not a single Philippine ycorrespondent accredited to the United Nations, but the name of a corres- pondent associated with the Manila Times was given to me through Ambassador Jimenez. With regard to Japanese correspondents, there are actually about twice as many as those listed. After consulta- tion with some of them I have extracted the heads of New York branches of each newspaper, television or broadcasting company and, where applicable, the ones assigned particularly to the United Nations. In addition to the above, the Secretary-General may wish / to invite at least the Permanent Representatives of the Philippines and JapanVand their Deputies. In the case of Japan, it might be suggested that, if possible, the number three and number four, Mr. War^and Mr. Kagajni, who have been in charge of the Secretary-General's visit to Japan, might be invited. The same consideration may apply of course to the Philippine Mission. v/The Consuls-General of the two countries may also be invited. H SAK/md 2 April 1970 The Secretary-General's luncheon to M& farewell to H.E. Mr* Kdroly Csatorday Frictegr, 5 April 1970, 1:33 *>•«** 38t& floor Sr. Sr. Bunche H.E* fir, Hambro S.E* Mr. Ogbu . I5r* Yost H,E* Lord Caradcn H.E. Mr. Jakol)son H.E. ^. Csatorday The Secretary-General H.E. M. Kosciusko-J^loriset x H.E. Mr. Malik x H.E, Mr. H.E. Sr. Solatia Lopes Mr* Korle SG luncheon to bid farewell to H.E. Mr. Karoly Csatorday, Friday, 5 April 1970; 1*15 p.m., 58th floor _ H.E. Mr. Karoly Csatorday - Hungary iXH.E. Mr. Y.A. Malik - USSR •L/H.E. OJie Rt.Hon. Ihe Lord Caradon - UK t/H.E. Mr. Milko Tarabanov - Bulgaria l/H.E. Mr. Max Jako"bson - Jlnland no H-*h-i)r-.-WaMd-^*fionri-^id;l^ (away) l/H.E. Mr. Edwin Ogebe Ogbu - Nigeria )/!!.£. Mr. Edvard Hambro - Horway no H-.E-»-M3?»-HaMilt6H-Sfeirley-jAHe3?aBiHghe-- - Geyleia (away) no H»E»-Bj?-r-F3?aHeiBee-Gw.evas-6aB.eiBe---Mexiee (away) no H-rE»-M]?»-Ii:igeHiHsa-KH^aga ---Pe±aH§ . (away) t/H.E. Mr. Charles W. Yost - USA I/ H.E. M. Jacques Kosciusko - Morizet - France V/H.E. Mr. Samar Sen - India no lXH-ErHMarr-Agha-Shah±---Pa;kfstan (away) ^/H.E. Sr. Miguel Solano Lopez - Paraguay no H-.S»-Mp»-MaBgalyH-Bage]?BHFeH-- -Mengeli a (in Geneva) The Secretary-General i/Mr. Wosek no Mj?»-KH.takev (away) j/Mr. Rolz-Bennett no M3?-r-Wa3?asimlaaH . Bunche . Korle m 16 cc: Mr. Korle Don by ffee Secretary K SG luncheon, Thursday, 26 March 1970, 1.15 p.m., 58th floor -1 fy /fu- /-?o L/4tr. Robert S. Benjamin (Chairman of the Board, United Artists Corporation) I/Mr. James A. Wechsler (Editorial Page Editor, MEW YORK POST) The Secretary-General no MrT-Harasinihan j/Dr. Bunche i/Mr. Rolz-Bennett '/H.E. Mr. Jarring cc: Don O IT !P M Ml M I: s?, 23 March 1970 The Secretary-General's luncheon to bid farewell to H.E. Mr. Patrick Shaw, C.B.E. Tuesday, 24 March 1970, 1:1? p.m., 38th floor M. Chayet H.E. Mr. Warner „,, »,ac. ,.....,„....,< Sr. Hols-Bennett f Dr. Bunche H.E. M. de Araujo Castro H.E. Mr. Sen i H.E. Mr. Beaulne r H.E. Mr. Malik H.E. Mr. Shaw x The Secretary-General t H.E. Mr. Yost ic H.E. U Soe Tin 5 H.E. Mr. Johnson x H.E. Mr. Tauruoka M. DJemakoye X :c Mr. Naraslmhan M. Korle Mr* Turner SG luncheon to bid farewell to H.E. Mr. Patrick Shaw, C.B.E., Tuesday , 2k March 1970, 1*15 p.m., ?8th floor _ The Secretary-General l/Mr. Bruce R. Turner v/ Mr. Narasimhan V/Dr. Bunche v/Mr. Rolz-Bennett v/Mr. Kbrle M. Djermakoye 18 cc: Mr. Korle Don AUSTRALIAN MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS ITEM YORK 27th February, 1970. My dear Secretary-General, At our meeting on Monday, 9th February, 1970, I mentioned to you the plnns of the Australian Govern.-ient for changes in overseas appointments which involved rny impending re-posting from New York. It is with mixed feelin°s that I now have to confirm this information. I have been informed that the Government of India has given its agrement to my appointment as High Commissioner for Australia in India. An announcement to this effect will be made in Canberra on 1st March. I should let you know confidentially at this stage that agre'ment is being sought to ray acceptance as Australian Ambassador to Nepal. The Australian Government has announced that my replacement as Australian Permanent Representative to the United Nations will be Sir Laurence Mclntyre, C.B.E., who is at present Deputy Secretary of the Department of External Affa irs, Canbe rra. Our travel arrangements have not been completed, but my wife and I expect to leave New York probably on 7th April, and my successor should arrive here shortly thereafter. I understand from Mr. Sinan Korle, Chief of Protocol, that you have been gracious enough to offer to entertain roe at / lunch on^uesday, 24th March, I greatly appreciate this gesture I* and look forward to being with you on that occasion. Yours sincerely, Permanent Representative •• ro H HSI W li ii Mr. Baraslmhon BM/fp £ wish ts you far your kiM l^tt^z- of March 26, 19TG. It vas a great ui |»2i,?ilieg& to meet Hfith you and ottoer of the Geaugarese For Feace I wets to justs year deep eoneesm for t&« o Oirgaaiaatiou. in this S5th X look ©xich H F, 3rBdfoi'd Morse of Consress Members of Congress For Peace Through Law SUITE 210/201 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE NE WASHINGTON, D. C. 20002 202/544-4250 STEERING COMMITTEE March 26th 1970 Joseph S. Clark Honorary Chairman F, Bradford Morse H.E. Mr. U Thant Chairman Secretary-General of the United Nations George McGovern The United Nations Vice Chairman New York, New York 10017 Mark Hatfleld Vice Chairman Dear Mr. Secretary-General; Robert W. Kastenmeler retary - Treasurer On behalf of the members of Members of Congress for Peace Through Law who were privileged to meet with you at your in- «J. S. SENATE formal reception last Friday at the United Nations, our deepest Edward W. Brooke appreciation for your having taken the time from your busy schedule Philip A. Hart to meet with us. We are grateful- to have had this opportunity to Walter F. Mondale share our deep concern for the Issues which confront all of us in Richard S. Schweiker our individual capacities. In this 25th Anniversary Year of the U.N., we hope to utilize the insights we gained from you in our U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES efforts in the Congress. Brock Adams We sincerely hope that we will be able to cintinue the Jonathan B. Blngham dialogue which was initiated at our meeting as we all strive John R. Dellenback for our common goal of world peace under law. Paul Flndley Paul N. McCloskey, Jr. Benjamin S. Rosenthal Again, our warmest thanks. Morris K. Udall Charles W.Whalen, Jr. With high regard, fan L. McKlnney Executive Director Sincerely, F. Bradford Morse Chairman .* SG reception for Members of Congress for Peace Through Law, Friday, 20 March 1970, ^-15 P-m., 38th floor Members of Congress for Peace Through Law plus wives (36) The Secretary-General Mr. Narasimhan Dr. Bunche Mr. Rolz-Bennett 7 Mr. Hoffman no My-r-IabeTaisse (away) Mr. Vaughan Mr. Kutakov Mr. Urquhart Mr. Powell Mr. Hassif cc: Don •f X-' UNITED STATES MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS March 19, 1970 TO : Mr. Lucien Lemieux jrf Ea/EDCEC OFRo FROM : T.P. Schottke, Jr. ,U&'' SUBJECT: Members of Congress ~fdr Jeace Through Law - Guest List for the Secretary-General's Reception - March 20, 1970 The following persons will be attending: U.S. Senators r Honorable Alan Cranston (California) 1 Honorable Robert ¥. Packwood (Oregon) 5 Honorable Claiborne Pell (Rhode Island) •^Honorable Richard S. Schweiker (Pennsylvania) U.S. Representatives f Honorable Brock Adams (Washington) (, Honorable Jonathan B. Bingham (New York) .f Honorable Peter H.B. Frelinghuysen (New Jersey) S Honorable Seymour Halpern (New York) f Honorable Robert W. Kastenmeier (Wisconsin) /, Honorable & Mrs. Clark MacGregor (Minnesota) ^Honorable Paul N. McCloskey (California) •s Honorable Abner J. Mikva (Illinois) ff Honorable Patsy T. Mink (Hawaii) /y Honorable Bradford F. Morse (Massachusetts) (i Honorable & Mrs. Charles A. Mosher (Ohio) Sf Honorable Bertram L. Podell (New York) '? Honorable Charles W. Whalen, Jr. (Ohio) MGPL Guests ^- ^ ? Mr. Larry Koegel 3 * Miss Phyllis Kotite "$'< Dr. Thomas Manton 3 i- Miss Joan McKinney 3>S Mr. & Mrs. Bill Montwieler I^Mr, Standford Z. Persons SH" Miss Susan Smith ^» Mr. Ronald Tammen cc: Mr. Andrew Stark-SG/OUSG/ADM/MGT Mr. Paul Hoffman-UEIDP *•' ec: Perm. Rep. US) Mr. Uarasifflhaa Mr. Hoffaan Mr. Stark Mr. Leoieux March 1970 la eoatimuatlea of «f t«t is* of 12 I wisfe t# inform arott l^fti 1 Saw gu all of you aad your wiv*E on tke 38tfe floor at ai. oa •' •••'*''^^*l^-"*> fcst I &ft looking to st«*tlBS $$» in two veeks Meaawhile, X refflaln, with kindest of Cozigrese f or Poaca JLaw 301 Kasaactmsetts srssisfcly s^©!f®i it Isst&sr t* irfsit If F&s ^e^ "tlmfe <§&«$* I ts* of i» t&» I ' X. » IM/nt x fi. It a. ®ff of ce - Perta. Sef ' Mr.- •Mr.-, ftr. 521 ~v • Members of Congress For Peace Through Law SUITE 210/201 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE NE WASHINGTON, D. C. 20002 202/544-4250 FEB February 5, 1970 STEERING COMMITTEE Joseph S. Clark " 3 Honorary Chairman F. Bradford Morse Chairman Honorable U Thant ^^XJeorge McGovern Secretary-General of the United ations .. Vice Chairman The United Nations New York, New York Mark Hatfleld Vice Chairman Dear Mr. Secretary-General: Robert W. Kastenmeler Secretary - treasurer We write on behalf of the 24 Senators and 69 Congressmen who belong to Members of Congress for Peace U. S. SEIMATF Through Law, a private bipartisan and bicameral group Srd W. Brooke of Members of the United States Congress working to Philip A. Hart promote a peaceful world under law. Walter F. Mondale Richard S. Schweiker we are planning to bring a number of oul:members and their wives to the United U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Nations. Our members would be honored to meet informally with you on that date. We have planned our program so v ffi. Brock Adams as to keep the period from 4:15 to 5:00 PM clear in the ''"'•Jonathan 8. Bingham hope that you will be able To mee"t"~"wi t h"" u"s7~ John R. Dellenback • Paul Fjndley Paul N. McCloskey, Jr. Our plans are to arrive that morning to attend a Benjamin S. Roserithal briefing by Ambassador Yost at the U.S. Mission, to lunch Morris K. Udalt with the Ambassadors on the Security Council, and to be Charles W. Whalen, Jr. briefed by Andrew Stark and Paul Hoffman during the afternoon. Joan L. McKinney Executive Director We are deeply aware that this year marks the 25th Anniversary of the United Nations and we want to do all that we can to contribute to substantive consideration of how the organization can be even more effective in the years ahead. We very much appreciate your willingness in the past to meet with Senators and Congressmen representing informal groups such as MCPL and hope that your schedule will .permit you to see us on March 20. We look forward to your favorable reply. Siiyterely , .„*-''^" F. Bradford Morse A/an CranTTton" ' vJonathan Bingham Chairman Co-Chairmen, United Nations Committee UNITED STATES MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS March 19, 1970 TO : Mr, Luc leu Lemieux '/EXEC FROM : T.P. Schottke, Jr. SUBJECT: Members of Congress for/Peace Tnrough Law - Guest List for the Secretary-General's Reception - March 20, 1970 The following persons will be attending: U0S« Senators f Honorable Alan Cranston (California) i Honorable Robert W, Packwood (Oregon) •j Honorable Claibome Pell (Rhode Island) •^Honorable Richard S. Schweiker (Pennsylvania) U.S. Representatives s' Honorable Brock Adams (Washington) Honorable Jonathan B. Bingham (New York) Honorable Peter H.B. Frelinghuysen (New Jersey) Honorable Seymour Halpern (New York) Honorable Robert W» Kastenmeier (Wisconsin) // Honorable & Mrs, dark MacGregor (Minnesota) , i., HonorablePaul N« McCloskey (California) , •»• HonorableAbner J« Mikva (Illinois) f*' Honorable Patsy T. Mink (Hawaii) /y Honorable Bradford ?• Morse (Massachusetts) (i Honorable & Mrs, Charles A, Mosher (Ohio) /f Honorable Bertram L, Podell (New York) '? Honorable Charles W, Whalen, Jr, (Ohio) MCPL Guests **> Dr, James Billington •*' Dr, Thomas Franck •>•' Dr, Richard Gardner •< '•''Prof, & Mrs. Covey Oliver *• *• Mr, & Mrs. Robert F. Meyerhoff i-^Honorable & Mrs, Joseph F, Clark (former Senator from Pennsylvania) - 2 - Staff . v, . MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FOR. PEACE THROUGH LAW Committee on U.S. - China Relations Rep. Patsy Mink, Chairman Papers Prepared for the Committee and Speakers Invited for Commentary March 18 United States - China Relations Administration Position Hon. Elliot Richardson Undersecretary of State March 26 Superpower Triangle Cong. Paul Findley Mr. Harrison Salisbury Assistant Managing Editor New York Times April 15 United States - China Trade Sen. Walter Mondale Hon. Alvin Hamilton ! Former Canadian Minister of Agriculture Negotiator of Sino-Canadian Wheat Agreement April 22 Communication and Travel with China Cong. Charles Whalen -Mr. Najeeb Halaby, President (invited) Pan American World Airways April 29 U.S. Defense in East Asia Cong. Morris Udall Professor Jerome A. Cohen Harvard Law School May 13 The ABM; Threat from China? Sen. Mark Hatfield Dr. Jeremy Stone Federation of American Scientists May 27 China and the United Nations Cong. Jonathan Bingham June 3 U.S. - China Relations; An Overview .... and Policy Recommendations Cong. Patsy Mink U.£. - China Relations Committee Meeting to determine Committee recommendations and final disposition of the report. Staff Consultant - Dr. Thomas B. Manton l\A*^-e~±J- COMMITTEE FOR NEW CHINA POLICY ROOM 9H 777 UNITED NATIONS PLAZA NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 CONFIDENTIAL NOT FOR PUBLICATION DRAFT POLICY STATEMENT The Committee for New China Policy advocates a new United States policy toward China which recognizes that the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate government of China. We will work for a United States policy of peace, understanding, and cooperation with the People's Republic of China, acknowledging that such a policy must be part of a changed approach by the United States toward Asia as a whole. We believe that such a policy requires that our government: 1) Return to the policy followed by the United States prior to the Korean War, which recognizes Taiwan as Chinese territory; and accept the position that, whatever the complexities of transition from the present political situation, the United States has no responsibility for determining the future status of Taiwan. 2) Cease intervention in China's civil war by withdrawing American forces from Taiwan and the Taiwan strait and terminate all military and economic aid to the Chiang Kai-shek government. 3) Abandon the current policy of military encirclement, economic blockade and violation of China's territorial integrity. 4) Acknowledge that the government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate representative of China in the United Nations and in all other international organizations. 5) Establish economic, social, cultural, and diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China on the basis of the principles of equality, mutual ree-pect, and non-intervention in each other's affairs. Adopted in principle - March 16, 1970. COMMITTEE FOR NEW CHINA POLICY / §# ROOM 9H 777 UNITED NATIONS PLAZA NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 CONFIDENTIAL NOT FOR PUBLICATION DRAFT POLICY STATEMENT The Committee for New China Policy advocates a new United States policy toward China which recognizes that the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate government of China. We will work for a United States policy of peace, understanding and cooperation toward the People's Republic of China. We believe that such a policy requires that our government: 1) Cease intervention in China's civil war by withdrawing American forces from Taiwan and the Taiwan strait and terminate all aid to the Chiang Kai-shek regime. 2) Abandon the current policy of military encirclement, economic blockade and violation of China's territorial integrity. 3) Acknowledge that the government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate representative of China in the United Nations and in all other international organizations. 4) Establish economic, social, cultural, and diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China on the basis of the principles of equality, mutual respect, and non-interventioa in each other's affairs. 5) Return to the policy followed by the United States prior to the Korean War, under which it is recognized that Taiwan is Chinese territory and that, whatever the complexities of transition from the present political situation, the United States has no role in determining the status of Taiwan within the People's Republic of China. Recommendation of Seminar Group Meeting in Canada March 5-7, 1970 By JOE FEUREY superintendent, Maj. Gen. Samuel W. WEST POINT, N.Y.— "What the people Koster, .announced he would leave in th-5 of this country don't understand," said the wake of Army Dept. charges -that he was 22-year-old West Pointer, "is . that the derelict in an investigation of the massacro' Pe.anle?-kave no regard for human life." . two years ago. - . "That's why when you fight them you Koster had informed' the 3700 cadecs can't use conventional means. To win you while they lunched in the Academy mess have to fight the same way they do." hall that he had requested a transfer to ."separate West Point from the continuing The cadet's classmates stood near the flow-of public announcements or'any other parade ground and , nodded in agree- connection with the alleged events which ,ment. Then cadet Arthur Schmidt from took place in Vietnam involving elements of Virginia continued his explanation of how my former command." the press had "overemphasized" the My Lai massacre. Koster was commanding general of thS Americal Division, a parent unit of the Task Just about everyone here at the U.S. Force that swept through the My Lai area Military Academy was talking about the GEN. KQSTEB : liiassacre yesterd"ay ' after the school's ..•', I-i ' } : i- Continued on'PdgB'5-'t' Cadets to his defense. \i Continued from Page Jf really could "hot "understand get edgy. You have to shoot Liberty, Iowa, Dec. 29, 1919, on March 16, 1968. the Vietnam war or know. anything that moves, even and went to school there. : The cadets gave their com- how to fight it. if it's just a bush. During the war he rose to mander a two-minute ova- "The American press only "We talked 'about jthis in regimental executive officer prints one side of the war,' tion. And throughout the class yesterday and our In- and was assigned, in 1946, to afternoon and into the eve- the cadet insisted. "The VC the Far East commanding commit atrocities too." He structor told us that the My' ning, in barracks and o/ the -Lai soldiers had been out on general's headquarters in campus walks, they con- said he had heard that the Tokyo. He returned to the Viet Cong had killed in patrol for 40 days and had tinued to praise and defend suffered 50 per cent casual- Point in 1949 as a tactical him. American soldier by putting officer. his head in a rat's cage. ties. Cadet Bill Goodrich of Ver- During the Korean war he He couldn't remember ex- "They really can't be jnont said of Koster: "He blamed for what happened served as the Eighth Army's was a good officer and a actly where he had heard that story, and made no com- out there. And it's a shame director of the guerrilla war good leader. We liked him that there's so much trouble effort against the North here. He was tall and had a parison to a similar incident in'George Orwell's "1984." over such a minor incident." Koreans. Kis next assign- lot of medals. He wore all The incident, according to ment was to SHAPE, in those medals on his uniform Cadet Charles Wilson of the Army investigation which Paris, as secretary of staff. and anyone who saw those Pennsylvania said Koster ended yesterday, was the After service in Georgia medals would realize he was could not be responsible fop murder of at least 102 civil- a good officer and a great a company-level action. and again hi Korea, he took American. You have a re- ians, old . men, women, chil- command of Task Force "But when you're out there. dren, and infants. ^H ! spect a man like that."' In combat, Oregon in Vietnam in 1967. Goodrich said civilians those Orientals.1 you nave to Koster, a 1942 graduate of The force was later officially the Point, was born in West called the American Division. NEWS RELEASE For Further Information For Release: A.M. Friday Sandy Persons - 544-42rjO November 7, 1969 Thirteen Senators and 44 Members of the House from both parties have written Secretary of'State William P. Rogers urging United States support for free II.N. t : '• use of INTELSAT facilities for rapid and direct world-wide communication. The letter was initiated in the United Nations Subcommittee of Members of Congress for Peace Through Law co-chaired by Senator Alan Cranston (D-Cal.) and Representsti Jonathan Bingham (D-N.Y.). The text of the letter and. list of signers follows: November 6, 1969 The Honorable William P. Rogers Secretary of State Washington, D. C. 20520 Dear Mr. Secretary: We, the undersigned Members of Congress, give our fullest backing to the recommendation of the Subcommittee on National Security Policy and Scientific Developments of the Committee on Foreign Affairs that " the United States should support reasonable requests by the Secretary General of the United Nations for free use of INTELSAT facilities." It is vitally important for the United Nations to have free access to the best facilities for rapid and direct xrorld-wide communication, if it is to be able to fulfill the mandate entrusted to it by the Member Nations and their peoples under the U.N. Charter. Not only would this service improve the operations of the U.N., for example, in Cyprus and the Middle East, but it would help to accomplish the urgent task of bringing the U.N. closer to the peoples of the world. It is our understanding that there is ample precedent, logic, and merit to warrant the immediate granting of free usage to the United Nations. Such privileged treatment for the U.N. would give concrete practical expression to the injunction of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty that this inter- national resource shall be used "in the interest of maintaining international peace and security and promoting international cooperation and understanding." We strongly urge that the United States press for favorable action on this request at the Preparatory Committee sessions of the Conference on Definitive Arrangements for the International Satellite Consortium and on every appropriate occasion. Sincerely, IN THE SENATE: Edward W. Brooke George McGovern Robert-W. Packwood Alan Cranston Charles McC.Mathias, Jr. Richard S. Schweiker Charles E. Goodell Walter Mondale Harrison A. Williams, Jr. Philip Hart Frank Moss Stephen M. Young Harold Hughes - 2 - IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: John B. Anderson Cornelius E. Gallagher F. Bradford Morse Jonathan B. Bingham William J. Green John E. Moss Edward P. Boland Gilvert Gude Richard L. Ottinger George E. Brown, Jr. Seymour Halpern Claude Pepper Daniel E. Button Augustus F. Hawkins Thomas M. Rees Silvio 0. Conte Henry Helstoski Ogden R. Reid John Conyers, Jr. Frank Horton Donald W. Riegle, Jr. James C. Gorman Edward I. Koch Benjamin S. Rosenthal John R. Dellenback Robert L. Leggctt Edward R. Roybal Don Edwards Allard K. Lowenstein William F. Ryan Joshua Eilberg Richard D. McCarthy James H. Scheuer Paul Findley Paul N. McCloskey, Jr. William St. Onge Donald M. Fraser Abner J. Mikva Morris K. Udall Peter H.B. Frelinghuysen Patsy T. Mink Charles W. Whalen, Jr. James G. Fulton William S. Moorhead 30 - wp; I VVJ Ur, T SG luncheon, Friday, 20 March 1970, 1.15 p.m., 58th floor v Mr. and Mrs. Walter Lippmann (Hotel Lowell, 28 East 6jrd Street) /o/uL/7o) . and Mrs. Fred friendly (Columbia University, 280-175^ card mailed l6 March 1970 to Ford Foundation, 520 East 43rd Street, HY 1001?) The Secretary-General . aa§-M&§. Urquhart no Ba?»-lttHehe no Ms-r-HayasiBhan no M3?»-Rels-leHHe%t cc: Don tf o i ITO. | 'M ROUTING SLIP FICHE DE TRANSMISSION TO: The Secretary-General A: FOR ACTION POUR SUITE A DONNER FOR APPROVAL POUR APPROBATION FOR SIGNATURE POUR SIGNATURE PREPARE DRAFT PROJET A REDIGER FOR COMMENTS POUR OBSERVATIONS MAY WE CONFER? POURRIONS-NOUS EN PARLER? YOUR ATTENTION VOTRE ATTENTION AS DISCUSSED COMME CONVENU AS REQUESTED SUITE A VOTRE DEMANDE NOTE AND FILE NOTER ET CLASSER NOTE AND RETURN NOTER ET RETOURNER FOR INFORMATION POUR INFORMATION Attached is the guest list for your reception in honour of the Executive Committee of UNCA on 19 March (6-7 p.m.) For your approval.