The 1960S a PROMISING TIME?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The 1960S a PROMISING TIME? The 1960s A PROMISING TIME? As the 1960s began, many Americans believed they lived in a “promising time.” The economy was doing well, the country seemed poised for positive changes, and a new generation of leaders was taking charge of the government. According to a Gallup poll, a majority of Americans believed their government would “always” do the right thing. In fact, many expressed hope that the federal government would be able to solve the nation’s remaining problems in the not too distant future. Another conception of “a promising time” dealt less with a sense of hope and anticipation of better times ahead, but rather with the fact that during the early 1960s politicians were doing a lot of “promising.” Often, they made promises without taking into consideration how realistic they were. This would eventually prove problematic since people who are promised something and then are disappointed when the promise goes unfulfilled tend to be more resentful than those who had never been promised something in the first place. ****** THE 1960 ELECTION Two young candidates, Democrat John F. Kennedy and Republican Richard M. Nixon ran for president in 1960. For the first time, both candidates were born in the 20th century, so in many ways the election marked the end of one era and the beginning of another, particularly since the outgoing President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, was the oldest man ever to hold the office. Kennedy, the Democrat, could not directly criticize the Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, since even after eight years in office, “Ike” remained hugely popular with the American people. Instead, he indirectly criticized the Eisenhower administration for not being activist enough. He told voters that eight years of conservative government had left the country “soft,” overly contented, lazy, and self-satisfied. As a result, the more dynamic Soviet Union was threatening to overtake the U.S. in the Cold War. (Kennedy called attention to the Soviets’ successful launching of the Sputnik satellite in 1957.) The Kennedy campaign coined a slogan to express this sense that only by voting for Kennedy could the nation “catch up” in the Cold War: “It’s time to get the country moving again.” 1 The slogan was effective largely because it tapped into the sense that 1960 was a “promising time,” but also because it was vague – it didn’t state where the country should be moving, so voters could assume that by voting for Kennedy, the country would move in the direction they wanted it to move. In fact, many did not interpret the slogan as a comment on the Cold War, but rather as a reference to civil rights, or economic policy, or the space program, or whatever they themselves cared about. In November 1960, Kennedy won the presidency in one of the closest elections in American history. Looking at how close the vote was, it hardly seemed like a ringing endorsement for Kennedy or the Democrats, but in the days and weeks afterward – and particularly after Kennedy delivered his memorable inaugural address on January 20, 1961 – it began to feel like the new President had a significant mandate to lead the nation in a new direction. Moreover, it appeared that the people wanted an activist government – a government that would intervene more aggressively to wage the Cold War against the Soviet Union and to.solve the nation’s domestic problems. KENNEDY’S FOREIGN POLICY Kennedy set out to be more pro-active than Eisenhower in stopping the spread of Communism. His rhetoric and his policies tended to be more aggressively anti- communist. During the 1960 campaign, for example, he had criticized Eisenhower for “allowing” a “”missile gap.” He claimed, falsely as it turned out, that the USSR had surpassed the US in it number of nuclear missiles. In fact, the US was far ahead, but Eisenhower could not (or chose not to) correct this false statement. CUBA Kennedy also criticized the Eisenhower administration for allowing Cuba to “go communist.” Kennedy believed that the Communist government in Cuba that had taken over in a revolution in 1959 posed a direct threat to U.S. national interests. He believed that to insure U.S. national security, Fidel Castro had to go. In the first days of his administration, he agreed to sign off on a plan that would overthrow Castro. The plan, which entailed an invasion of Cuba led by Cuban exiles (funded by the American CIA), was referred to later as the Bay of Pigs Invasion. 2 The hope was that once the exiles landed in Cuba, the Cuban people would rise up against Castro and support the invaders. This did not happen. (In 1961, most Cubans still supported Castro and had not grown disillusioned with the repressiveness of his Communist regime.) As a result, the invasion was a fiasco and failed spectacularly. It was a great embarrassment for the new Kennedy administration, even though the plan itself had been drawn up during Eisenhower’s administration. The question later arose, Why would Kennedy authorize such a dubious plan? In part, he did so because he assumed that the plan, devised by the Eisenhower administration, would eventually become public. If he did not agree to go forward with it, even after Eisenhower had approved it, he would look weak. Since the whole theme of his presidential campaign had been to make U.S. foreign policy more dynamic and to demonstrate U.S. “strength” in the world, he felt he had little choice but to proceed with the invasion. Its failure, however, left Kennedy feeling he had to achieve some kind of foreign policy success. Tensions with the Soviets in Berlin afforded him an opportunity. BERLIN Berlin, the capital of Germany until the end of World War II, was located in the center of the Soviet zone of the newly divided Germany. After 1945, the city itself was divided in half – the east side under Soviet control; the west side under U.S. control. This was particularly frustrating for the Soviets since many men and women who lived in Eastern Europe under Communism sought to escape through West Berlin. They simply traveled from places under Soviet control (Czechoslovakia, Hungary, etc.) to Berlin. Once in the city, they then crossed into West Berlin and took the next plane out to places like France, England, or the United States. These tended to be the smartest, most ambitious, most talented, and most entrepreneurial people. Their departure from the Communist world to the West was called the “brain drain.” In short, these people could choose which system was better – Communism or democracy – by “voting with their feet.” And since everyone went from the Soviet zone to the American zone, it seemed clear to most observers which system was better. Many US officials feared that the Soviets would try to take over West Berlin so as to solve the problem of the “brain drain.” In such a situation, the question arose as to how the US should respond. Was it worth going to war – perhaps even a nuclear war – to preserve the freedom of the West Berliners? To stop the “brain drain” out of Eastern, Soviet-controlled Europe, the Soviets built a wall around the city of West Berlin. This wall was intended to keep people from escaping into the West. However, it also made the Communist system look even more oppressive. The Wall solved the Soviets’ “brain drain” problem, but was a public 3 relations disaster since it made it appear that they were literally imprisoning the citizens of Eastern Europe. In 1963, Kennedy traveled to Berlin and spoke at the Wall. He referred to the Wall as a symbol of Soviet oppression and the failure of the Communist system. He told the cheering crowd that all people in the world who wondered which side in the Cold War offered genuine freedom should “come to Berlin” and see for themselves. All people who were dedicated to preserving freedom and liberty, he said, were “Berliners.” The Kennedy speech at the Berlin Wall proved one of the high points of his administration and a major propaganda victory for the U.S. in the Cold War. This was the foreign policy “win” Kennedy had been looking for. VIETNAM As in Cuba, Kennedy also pursued a more aggressive policy in Vietnam. The nation had been a French colony since the 19th century, however it was occupied by Japan during World War II. When the Japanese surrendered in 1945, the Allies forced them out of Vietnam and the Vietnamese Communists under Ho Chi Minh expected that the country would finally gain its independence. In fact, the Vietnamese Communists did establish a government in the Northern half of the country, but in the South the French returned to reclaim their old colony. The Vietnamese Communists then declared war on the French, a war that lasted until the French finally withdrew in 1954. During this war, the U.S. had supported (and funded) the French. When the French left, the Eisenhower administration pledged to support the anti-Communist Vietnamese in the South. When Kennedy took over, he continued this support and even hoped to escalate the U.S. role if that could insure the defeat of the North Vietnamese Communists. Most Vietnamese, however, saw the war as less a Cold War struggle between Communism and democracy and more an anti-imperialist war waged to expel foreigners (of any kind) from Vietnam. Vietnamese in the North and the South were just as suspicious of the Americans as they had been of the French and the Japanese. The Americans continued their support of the South Vietnamese convinced that they would succeed where the French had failed.
Recommended publications
  • France Invades the 1961 White House
    France Invades the 1961 White House Christopher Early East Carolina University Visual Arts and Design Faculty Mentor Hunt McKinnon East Carolina University Throughout its history, America‟s White House has undergone many changes through its many administrations. While a select few presidents worked to improve it, most others merely neglected it. No one, however, worked harder in restoring the White House interior than Jacqueline Kennedy, wife of President John F. Kennedy, who occupied the Executive Mansion from January 1961 until November 1963. Soon after Kennedy‟s election to the presidency in November 1960, a pregnant Jacqueline Kennedy visited the White House, as per protocol, and was given a tour of her soon-to-be-home by the outgoing First Lady, Mamie Eisenhower. “Jackie‟s first visit to the White House was her coming-out party as the next first lady.” 1 After viewing the condition of the White House, Mrs. Kennedy was appalled by its drab furniture and design. She was shocked that the White House interior, that of America‟s preeminent home, had been so woefully decorated. To her, it was nothing short of a national disgrace. Soon after taking up residence in the White House, both the President and his First Lady were struck by how depressing, drab, and tasteless the home appeared. Furniture in rooms did not match with each other, nor did paintings adorning the walls. There were no unifying themes in individual rooms or the mansion as a whole. “To her dismay she found the upstairs family quarters decorated with what she called „early Statler‟; it was so cheerless and undistinguished it wasn‟t even worthy of a second-class hotel.
    [Show full text]
  • The President Has Been Shot Excerpt
    m1899_presidenthas_INT_FNL.indd 1 6/7/13 3:21 PM SCHOLASTIC PRESS | NEW YORK m1899_presidenthas_INT_FNL.indd 2 6/7/13 3:21 PM THE ASSASSINATION OF JOHN F. KENNEDY JAMES L. SWANSON m1899_presidenthas_INT_FNL.indd 3 6/7/13 3:21 PM Text copyright © 2013 by James L. Swanson All rights reserved. Published by Scholastic Press, an imprint of Scholastic Inc., Publishers since 1920. SCHOLASTIC, SCHOLASTIC PRESS, and associated logos are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of Scholastic Inc. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of the publisher. For information regarding permission, write to Scholastic Inc., Attention: Permissions Department, 557 Broadway, New York, NY 10012. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Swanson, James L., 1959– “The president has been shot!” : the assassination of John F. Kennedy/by James L. Swanson. — First edition. pages cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-545-49007-8 (hardcover :alk. paper) 1. Kennedy, John F. (John Fitzgerald), 1917–1963 — Assassination — Juvenile literature. I. Title. E842.9.S95 2013 973.922092 — dc23 2012041167 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 13 14 15 16 17 Printed in the U.S.A. 23 First edition, October 2013 The display type was set in Gotham. The text was set in Adobe Garamond. Book design by Phil Falco m1899_presidenthas_INT_FNL.indd 4 6/7/13 3:21 PM FOR ANDREA AND MY FATHER, LENNART m1899_presidenthas_INT_FNL.indd 5 6/7/13 3:21 PM TABLE OF CONTENTS m1899_presidenthas_INT_FNL.indd 6 6/7/13 3:21 PM BEGINNINGS – IX – • PART ONE • INTRODUCTION TO JOHN F.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1960 Presidential Election in Florida: Did the Space Race and the National Prestige Issue Play an Important Role?
    UNF Digital Commons UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations Student Scholarship 2000 The 1960 rP esidential Election in Florida: Did the Space Race and the National Prestige Issue Play an Important Role? Randy Wade Babish University of North Florida Suggested Citation Babish, Randy Wade, "The 1960 rP esidential Election in Florida: Did the Space Race and the National Prestige Issue Play an Important Role?" (2000). UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 134. https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/etd/134 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at UNF Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UNF Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Digital Projects. © 2000 All Rights Reserved THE 1960 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN FLORIDA: DID THE SPACE RACE AND THE NATIONAL PRESTIGE ISSUE PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE? by Randy Wade Babish A thesis submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES December, 2000 Unpublished work © Randy Wade Babish The thesis of Randy Wade Babish is approved: (Date) Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Signature Deleted Accepted for the College: Signature Deleted Signature Deleted eanofGfaduate rues ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Although my name appears on the title page and I assume full responsibility for the final product and its content, the quality of this work was greatly enhanced by the guidance of several individuals. First, the members of my thesis committee, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee State Library and Archives TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF
    State of Tennessee Department of State Tennessee State Library and Archives 403 Seventh Avenue North Nashville, Tennessee 37243-0312 TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION OF MEDICAID HOSPITAL PHOTOGRAPHS, ca. 1955 RECORD GROUP 64 Processed by: M. J. H. Date Completed: August 1980 SCOPE AND CONTENT Record Group Number 64, transferred to the Archives in 1978, consists of a series of photographs of health facilities in Tennessee. Some of the photographs show completed structures already in use, while others are of scale drawings or construction at various stages. Most of the photographs are undated, but it appears from the departmental stamps on the backs that they were taken about August 1955. The original purpose for which these photographs were intended is unclear; they may have been used to comply with requirements governing federal funding of hospitals. The photographs are arranged in alphabetical order by hospital name. CONTAINER LIST Box 1 1 Bedford County Hospital, Shelbyville, Tennessee (1 shot) ca. August 1955 2 Blanche Bomer Morgan Health Center, Brownsville (Haywood County), Tennessee (1shot) ca. August 1955 3 Bradley County Memorial Hospital, Cleveland, Tennessee (1 shot) ca. August 1955 4 Bristol Memorial Hospital, Bristol (Sullivan County), Tennessee (2 shots) ca. August 1955 5 Carter County Health Center, Elizabethton, Tennessee (1 shot) ca. August 1955 6 Clarksville Memorial Hospital and Addition, Clarksville (Montgomery County), Tennessee (1 shot) ca. August 1955 7 Coffee County Hospital, Manchester, Tennessee
    [Show full text]
  • Country Term # of Terms Total Years on the Council Presidencies # Of
    Country Term # of Total Presidencies # of terms years on Presidencies the Council Elected Members Algeria 3 6 4 2004 - 2005 December 2004 1 1988 - 1989 May 1988, August 1989 2 1968 - 1969 July 1968 1 Angola 2 4 2 2015 – 2016 March 2016 1 2003 - 2004 November 2003 1 Argentina 9 18 15 2013 - 2014 August 2013, October 2014 2 2005 - 2006 January 2005, March 2006 2 1999 - 2000 February 2000 1 1994 - 1995 January 1995 1 1987 - 1988 March 1987, June 1988 2 1971 - 1972 March 1971, July 1972 2 1966 - 1967 January 1967 1 1959 - 1960 May 1959, April 1960 2 1948 - 1949 November 1948, November 1949 2 Australia 5 10 10 2013 - 2014 September 2013, November 2014 2 1985 - 1986 November 1985 1 1973 - 1974 October 1973, December 1974 2 1956 - 1957 June 1956, June 1957 2 1946 - 1947 February 1946, January 1947, December 1947 3 Austria 3 6 4 2009 - 2010 November 2009 1 1991 - 1992 March 1991, May 1992 2 1973 - 1974 November 1973 1 Azerbaijan 1 2 2 2012 - 2013 May 2012, October 2013 2 Bahrain 1 2 1 1998 - 1999 December 1998 1 Bangladesh 2 4 3 2000 - 2001 March 2000, June 2001 2 Country Term # of Total Presidencies # of terms years on Presidencies the Council 1979 - 1980 October 1979 1 Belarus1 1 2 1 1974 - 1975 January 1975 1 Belgium 5 10 11 2007 - 2008 June 2007, August 2008 2 1991 - 1992 April 1991, June 1992 2 1971 - 1972 April 1971, August 1972 2 1955 - 1956 July 1955, July 1956 2 1947 - 1948 February 1947, January 1948, December 1948 3 Benin 2 4 3 2004 - 2005 February 2005 1 1976 - 1977 March 1976, May 1977 2 Bolivia 3 6 7 2017 - 2018 June 2017, October
    [Show full text]
  • The Secret Service and the JFK Assassination
    Digital Commons @ Georgia Law Popular Media Faculty Scholarship 9-5-2012 Intriguing Mystery - The ecrS et Service and the JFK Assassination Donald E. Wilkes Jr. University of Georgia School of Law, [email protected] Repository Citation Wilkes, Donald E. Jr., "Intriguing Mystery - The eS cret Service and the JFK Assassination" (2012). Popular Media. 170. https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_pm/170 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Popular Media by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. Please share how you have benefited from this access For more information, please contact [email protected]. Intriguing Mystery The Secret Service and the JFK Assassination The conclusion seems inescapable that the Secret Service bungled its responsibilities prior to and during the assassination of JFK. By Donald E. Wilkes, Jr. Wednesday, September 5, 2012 “Kennedy was killed by a breakdown in a protective system that should have made the assassination impossible.”—Robert Groden and Harrison Livingston, High Treason (2d ed. 1989). “The extremely poor performance of the president’s bodyguards has led some people to suspect the Secret Service was somehow involved in a conspiracy to kill Kennedy, although there has never been any proof that this was so.”—James P. Duffy and Vincent L. Ricci, The Assassination of John F. Kennedy (1992). “The reason for their [the Secret Service’s] neglect remains one of the intriguing mysteries of the [Kennedy] assassination.”—Michael L. Kurtz, Crime of the Century (1982). A Major Malfunction On Friday, Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • 13 November, A.D. 2026 Exponential Growth Or Decay of Such a Population with a Time Constant of L/Ao
    and structure of semiconduc- in the "normal" semiconductors considered I have tried here to put the emphasis position here. on those basic properties that are com- tors on the one hand and parameters 11. P. Fielding, G. Fischer, E. Mooser, J. Phys. mon to all semiconductors and that such as energy gap and charge-carrier Chem. Solids 8, 434 (1959). 12. H. Winston, Phys. Rev. 94, 328 (1954). distinguish them from other solids. It mobility on the other. 13. S. Geller and J. H. Wernick, Acta Cryst. 12, is interesting as well as surprising to 46 (1959). 14. U. Winkler, Helv. Phys. Acta 28, 633 (1955). see how the many and various semi- References and Notes 15. P. Junod. E. Mooser, H. Schade, ibid. 29, conducting compounds are all governed 193 (1956). 1. A. H. Wilson, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) 16. E. Mooser and W. B. Pearson, Phys. Rev. by the same simple chemical and struc- A133, 458 (1931). 101, 492 (1956). 2. , ibid. A134, 277 (1931). tural rules. These rules present a chal- 7a, 744 (1952). 17. , J. Chem. Phys. 26, 893 (1957). 3. H. Welker, Z. Naturforsch. G. Busch, F. Hulliger, U. Winkler, Helv. lenge to the theoretician, who has yet 4. The zinc blende structure can be considered 18. a superlattice of the diamond structure. Phys. Acta 27. 195 (1954). to interpret them in a rigorous way. 5. E. Mooser and W. B. Pearson, Progress in 19. J. Appel, Z. Naturforsch. 9a, 265 (1954). They present a challenge also to the Semiconductors, vol. 5 (Heywood, London, 20.
    [Show full text]
  • Membership of the Bureau of the General Conference
    MEMBERSHIP OF THE BUREAU OF THE GENERAL CONFERENCE States Date of entry Number of times member of Bureau Afghanistan 4 May 1948 6 Albania 16 October 1958 3 Algeria 15 October 1962 9 Andorra 20 October 1993 – Angola 11 March 1977 4 Antigua and Barbuda 15 July 1982 – Argentina 15 September 1948 16 Armenia 9 June 1992 – Australia 4 November 1946 19 Austria 13 August 1948 9 Azerbaijan 3 June 1992 2 Bahamas 23 April 1981 1 Bahrain 18 January 1972 2 Bangladesh 27 October 1972 3 Barbados 24 October 1968 9 Belarus 12 May 1954 – Belgium 29 November 1946 11 Belize 10 May 1982 – Benin 18 October 1960 5 Bhutan 13 April 1982 – Bolivia, Plurinational State of 13 November 1946 – Bosnia and Herzegovina 2 June 1993 3 Botswana 16 January 1980 1 Brazil 4 November 1946 22 Brunei Darussalam 17 March 2005 – Bulgaria1 17 May 1956 7 Burkina Faso 14 November 1960 2 Burundi 16 November 1962 5 Cambodia2 3 July 1951 – Cameroon 11 November 1960 10 Canada 4 November 1946 20 Cabo Verde 15 February 1978 1 Central African Republic 11 November 1960 3 Chad 19 December 1960 2 Chile 7 July 1953 9 China 4 November 1946 20 Colombia 31 October 1947 6 Comoros 22 March 1977 2 Congo 24 October 1960 2 Cook Islands 25 October 1989 – Costa Rica 19 May 1950 7 Côte d’Ivoire 27 October 1960 6 Croatia 1 June 1992 5 Cuba 29 August 1947 13 Cyprus 6 February 1961 – 1 At the 35th session of the General Conference, Bulgaria was a member of the Bureau in two capacities (Vice- President of the General Conference and Chairperson of the SC Commission).
    [Show full text]
  • No. 3 November 1960
    An American-Style University for Iran: Dr. Harnwell's Report During the past summer President Gaylord P. Harnwell and three other members of the University's administrative staff and faculty travelled to Iran under auspices of the U. S. State Department to advise educators and government officials there in planning the establishment of a new university modelled along American lines. Upon his return The Almanac requested comment from him on the activities of his committee in this matter. His report follows: Currently thousands of students from Iran are attending institutions of higher learning in Europe and the United States as part of their nation's effort to leap the centuries University Senate Meets Nov. 30 and achieve a distinguished position among the growing The University Senate's first meeting of the Fall Term nations of the Middle East and of the world. will be held in Ballantyne Auditorium (Room W-l), As these young men and women complete their training Dietrich Hall, beginning at 1 P.M. on Wednesday, Novem- abroad, they understandably show some reluctance to ber 30. return to their native land where current conditions are After an opening statement by Professor Arthur P. less attractive and opportunities somewhat restricted. The Whitaker, Chairman of the Senate, President Gaylord P. Iranian Government, aware that its most valuable national Harnwell will address the meeting. product is thus being exported, is seeking to provide edu- Brief talks, followed by an opportunity for questions cational opportunities within Iran itself to match those of from the floor, will then be given by Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
    RESTRICTED GENERAL AGREEMENT ON L/1907 14 November 1962 TARIFFS AND TRADE Limited Distribution CONTRACTING PARTIES Twentieth Session PROVISIONAL ACCESSION OF ARGENTINA Extension of the Declaration of lb November 1960 Procès-verbal dated 7 November 1962 The parties to the Declaration on the Provisional Accession of Argentina to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, of 18 November 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "the Declaration of 18 November 1960" and "the General Agreement" respectively), Desiring to extend the Declaration pursuant to paragraph 4, Acting pursuant to paragraph 4 thereof: Agree: 1. The period of validity of the Declaration of 18 November 1960 is extended for two years by changing the date in paragraph 4 from "31 December 1962" to "31 December 1964". ?. This Procès-verbal shall be deposited with the Exeoutive Secretary of the ONTRACTING PARTIES to the General Agreement. It shall remain open for ceptance, by signature or otherwise, by Argentina, by the participating govern- vts to the Declaration of 18 November 1960, and by contracting parties to the 3ral Agreement and other governments following their acceptance of the aration of 18 November 1960. 3. This Procès-verbal shall enter into force upon its acceptance by all the parties to the Declaration of 18 November 1960; provided that if it shall not have been accepted by all such parties by 31 December 1962, (a) it shall enter into force in respect of those parties thereto which shall have accepted it as soon as it shall have been accepted by Argentina and any other such party; and (b) it shall enter into force for any such party subsequently accepting it upon such acceptance or upon the entry into force of the Declaration of 18 November 1960 in respect of such party, whichever is the later.
    [Show full text]
  • Questions Relating to the Situation in the Republic of the Congo (Leopoldville)
    52 POLITICAL AND SECURITY QUESTIONS CHAPTER VII QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE SITUATION IN THE REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO (LEOPOLDVILLE) POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS The United Nations undertook action with re- observed that the only sound and lasting solu- gard to the situation in the Republic of the tion to the difficulties which had developed in Congo (Leopoldville)1 shortly after this former the Congo was for the instruments of the Gov- Belgian-administered territory gained independ- ernment, particularly its security administration, ence, when difficulties developed in connexion to be rendered capable of ensuring the mainte- with the maintenance of law and order and the nance of order and the protection of life. Tech- Belgian Government sent its troops to the nical assistance, which he had already under- Congo. Acceding to a request of the Congolese taken at the request of the Congolese Govern- Government, the United Nations embarked on ment, would, however, take some time to the biggest single military assistance operation produce satisfactory results. For the intermedi- organized and directed by itself. The progress ary period, he strongly recommended that the of the operation, the problems encountered in Council accede to the request for military assist- the achievement of its purposes and the develop- ance and authorize him to take the necessary ment of the situation in the Congo were the steps in consultation with the Congolese Govern- subject of discussion not only in the Security ment. It would then be understood that the Council which initiated the action, but also at Belgian Government would see its way to a the fourth emergency special session of the Gen- withdrawal of its troops.
    [Show full text]
  • General Ageementon L/1907
    GENERAL AGEEMENTON L/1907. TARIFFS AND TRADE 14 November 1962 Limited Distribution CONTARCTING PARTIES Twentieth Session PROVISIONAL ACCESSION OF ARGENTINA Extension of the Declaration of 18 November 1960 Procès-verbal dated 7 November 1962 The parties to the Declaration on the ProvisionalAccession of Argentina to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, of 18 November 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "the Declaration of 18 November 1960'' and "the General Agreement" TespectiveLy), Desiring to extend the Declaration pursuant to paragraph 4, Acting pursuant to paragraph 4 thereof: Agree: 1. The period of validity of the Declaration of 18 November 1960 is extended for two years by changing the date in paragraph 4 from "31 December 1962" to "31 December 1964". 2. This Procè-verbal shall be deposited with the Exeoutive Secretary of the CONTRACTING PARTIES to the General Agreement. It shall remain open for acceptance, by signature or otherwise, by Argentina, by the participating govern- ments to the Declaration of 18 November 1960, and by contracting parties to the General Agreement and other governments following their acceptance of the Declaration of 18 November 1960. 3. This Procès-verbal shall enter into force upon its acceptance by all the parties to the Declaration of 18 November 1960; provided that if it shall not have been accepted by all such parties by 31 December 1962, (a) it shall enter into force in respect of those parties thereto which shall have accepted it as soon as it shall have been accepted by Argentina and any other such party; and (b) it shall enter into force for any such party subsequently accepting it upon such acceptance or upon the entry into force of the Declaration of 18 November 1960 in respect of is the later.
    [Show full text]