ments, armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage necassary for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security. Now there is an already adopted principle that is set up that is much further than the principle of the International Trade Organization Charter, in respect to investments in developed or underdeveloped countries. There is the principle set that for certain overriding policies we agree to supply men and arms and give access to this country for proper outside foreign forces to carry those policies out; provided, however, that they are in accordance with a special agreement or agreements that are later to be made by the United States covering the specific events or circumstances.

The United States, therefore, has kept its right by special agreements or, if you want to call them that, treaties or executive agreements, to mold the future course of the obligation under article 43 of the United Nations Charter.

I believe you will agree with that.

Now, if that is the case, that under article 43 we have retained this right to mold treaties and executive agreements, either multilateral or bilateral, with other countries, we have not gone one step beyond our foreign policy in saying that on the level of international investment, under articles 11 and 12, we likewise maintain the right by specific trade and treaty arrangements to have agreements on a lower level that implement these policies. So, we have not given anything away; have we? We are following the same course we did under the United Nations Charter.

Now then, going a little further, in order to be brief, let us look a little more closely at the lend-lease agreements of 1942.

Those lend-lease agreements not only supplied the items that were necessary to these countries in order to keep their economies on a basis where they could prosecute a successful war for democratic principles but they also did this: These agreements were open to all countries of like mind for the expansion of production, employment, and exchange in consumption of goods, including the reduction of tariffs, elimination of tariff preferences, and for the removal of other barriers to the expansion of international trade.

So, between the United Nations Charter and the lend-lease agreements, Mrs. Bolton's point is fully answered. We are not going one step in the International Trade Organization Charter beyond the commitments we have previously made other documents.

Do I have time to take up Bretton Woods?

Chairman KEE. I would prefer your suspending, Mr. Fulton. We were trying to get some information from this witness and he has already given his testimony. You are making a fine argument, but he is already convinced that the charter is all right.

Mr. FULTON. I want his members to feel that articles 11 and 12 are not in variance with our historic basic foreign policy. I want to show that we are not in the ITO going beyond these principles.

May I say the group Mr. Lazarus represents is equally as important as the United States Chamber of Commerce. I want to convince these independent-minded businessmen of the necessity of this charter as the next logical step in our evolving policy. May I say to you that, unless we on this committee do convince people who are on this high and unbiased level, this charter will fail on the floor.

Chairman KEE. I do not think you can convince them. They are not present at this time. You can write a brief for that purpose and send it to this organization if you wish, but we have other witnesses, Mr. Fulton, here, who are waiting to be heard.

Mr. FULTON. May I have two more minutes? If so, I will conclude. Chairman KEE. Certainly.

Mr. FULTON. I might say that I consider you, Mr. Lazarus, one of the most important witnesses to come before this group.

Mr. LAZARUS. I thank you.

Mr. FULTON. You and your group come with an open mind and you have a good, scientific, level-headed approach. Anything that I can do to carry the word to them of the spirit in which this document was written, and the fact that it is based on what the present practicalities are, with a view to the future to try to reach those things that you and I both want, I will be happy to do.

One of the criticisms has been that the charter stoops to what is here at the present time in international relations. Yes; it must come down to that practical level or it is merely a theoretical instrument under which no one will live.

You have made a good point here that it is a start, and it is the framework within which we can work out these policies for the future. May I say then to you, Do you not agree that it is necessary at once to take the start before we get our international relations into a more precarious state, and before we may come under the cloud of a disruption, of let us call it renewed world civil strife, and before the new trade barriers become erected and the nations divide themselves into cartels and blocs?

Mr. LAZARUS. We think our statement emphasizes the immediacy of action.

Mr. FULTON. So, the immediacy of action is important?

Mr. LAZARUS. That is right.

Mr. FULTON. Thank you very much.

Mr. LAZARUS. I am very grateful to you, Judge Kee.

Chairman KEE. Mr. Richards, have you any questions?

Mr. RICHARDS. I have no questions.

Mr. FULTON. I want to thank you, Mr. Lazarus. I think you have given a very high level presentation.

Chairman KEE. We appreciate your coming here very much, sir. Our next witness is Mr. David Kauffman, representing the United States Junior Chamber of Commerce in connection with this hearing. We are very glad to have you with us, Mr. Kauffman, and if you have a written statement you may read it, or you may proceed in any manner you wish.

STATEMENT OF DAVID KAUFFMAN, REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Mr. KAUFFMAN. My name is David Kauffman, I am an attorney of Cumberland, Md., and I am here to represent the United States Junior Chamber of Commerce on the hearings on the ITO.

The United States Junior Chamber of Commerce, an organization composed of some 1,800 clubs with about 160,000 members has requested

permission to be heard before the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives, with a view toward advancing its feelings in the question of the International Trade Organization. By way of preface I should like to state that the United States Junior Chamber of Commerce is a civic service organization for young men between the ages of 21 and 35 inclusive. It is dedicated to two purposes: Community betterment and development of its individual members to train them for business advancement and civic leadership. In the course of its program of learning civic consciousness through constructive action the International Affairs Committees of the United States Jaycees have considered on several occasions the problem of the International Trade Organization. Their feelings in this matter may best be expressed by the reading of the latest resolution of the organization which was passed in national convention assembly at Colorado Springs, Colo., as of June 1949. That resolution reads as follows:

Whereas the United States and other nations have alined themselves together in the International Trade Organization which works for collaboration, consultation, and negotiation among the nations on matters affecting international trade and commerce; and

Whereas the program of reciprocal trade agreements initiated by the United States of America 15 years ago has kept our country in a position of leadership in this vital phase of international relations; and

Whereas this program should be strengthened if the economic phase of international relations is to be guided toward world prosperity rather than world depression: Now therefore be it

Resolved, That the United States Junior Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors reaffirms the action of the convention of June 1948, urging congressional support of the principles of the International Trade Organization by now urging Congress to pass legislation permitting United States membership in the International Trade Organization and to appropriate necessary funds for participation.

Now in connection with that, Mr. Chairman, I might say that you might be interested in the modus operandi of the United States Junior Chamber of Commerce and how we come to the conclusion of whether or not to support or be resistant to any particular bill.

We have an executive committee set up. We have a number of standing committees. One of those standing committees and one of our more important committees is the international affairs committee. That international affairs committee is composed of a number of men. They in turn hold meetings. They receive the views of the various departments in connection with these various bills and they hold open seminars and forums for their groups on a State and National level, particularly at national conventions.

I would welcome an opportunity to answer any question that I might be able to on this rather complicated technical matter.

Chairman KEE. Mr. Richards, have you any questions?

Mr. RICHARDS. I want to congratulate the witness on his very concise statement in regard to this bill and express my appreciation for his coming here.

Chairman KEE. Mrs. Bolton, have you any questions?

Mrs. BOLTON. No questions.

Chairman KEE. Mr. Fulton-

Mr. FULTON. I understand you endorse the ITO Charter for the Junior Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. That is right.

Mr. FULTON. As a member of the Junior Chamber of Commerce myself, may I congratulate you because I think it is a very progressive step forward and I am glad to have you here.

From having heard part of this argument previously, do you believe as a witness that the ITO Charter is within the scope of American foreign policy as we have developed it since 1922?

Mr. KAUFFMAN. I certainly do believe it is within that scope, Mr. Fulton. In point of fact, article 11 and article 12 I have read and heard argued with some appreciation of the difficulties involved. It is a question in which anyone would be reluctant to have an outright commitment. It is almost impossible to make an outright commitment in connection with those matters.

The mere expression that we are willing to sit down and negotiate on those matters is a sign of hope to most industrially backward countries and to underdeveloped countries and I believe is something which is of encouragement to them, even though our own obligation in the strict sense and legal sense of the term "obligation," is to do no more than to sit down at the conference table with them.

Mr. FULTON. So that you feel that it is a hand outstretched by the United States to offer to negotiate upon just principles which will be fair to each of the negotiating parties, with a wholesome selfishness on each side of the table.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. I concur in that; yes, Mr. Fulton.

Mr. FULTON. And then in addition would you say, as I do, that it is impossible in advance, with the extreme complexity, not only of the types of countries and the commodities involved, but also of the times and the change of times, to bind in advance people of different levels to specific commitments.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. I agree wholeheartedly in that.

In point of fact, I can envisage a situation under these particular articles in which the United States without spending a dime would be of tremendous help to other countries.

For example, the Área Development Division of the United States Department of Commerce has at its fingertips various plans for community action of industrial development and things of that nature. Merely the availability of that information, the technique of industrial development, would be of considerable aid to any country which might wish to further go into that field.

Mr. FULTON. Also there is the bold new program under Point 4, where we could sit down and either through bilateral arrangements or multilateral arrangements make specific treaties that will cover any field or any group of commodities within the framework of the general policies of the ITO?

Mr. KAUFFMAN. Mr. Fulton, to answer that question, I would have to depart from the strict jurisdiction with which I am encompassed and circumscribed by because we have not decided as a group how we stand on Point 4, for example.

Mr. FULTON. Let me limit my question to this, then, that the charter nevertheless permits the development of such a policy, if such a policy be wise. There is the possibility under the charter for such development.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. That is true. A great deal depends on construction of the charter by the members of the organization and of course by the members of Congress and the other nations.

Mr. FULTON. Then we in the Foreign Affairs Committee, when we come to write our report, can construe what we mean on various articles of the charter, in order to set down definitely the meaning of words. That I believe would be a help in some instances. Do you not agree with that?

Mr. KAUFFMAN. Definitions are always a help.

Mr. FULTON. Then going a little further, with regard to the general position of the United States on its world leadership in economic matters and world trade, I would like to call your attention to the fact that under the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4 of 1949 we again stated under article 2 that the parties will seek to eliminate conflicts in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.

Now if you take the charter as the least common denominator of saying that we are willing to sit down within certain just principles and negotiate, I believe you would agree with me that that is completely within the intent of article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty which we have just entered into on April 4, 1949.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. I believe it is in conformity with the general United States foreign policy. There is nothing revolutionary about the principle of negotiation on helping other countries in connection with economical organizations.

Mr. FULTON. How do you feel about what would happen if the charter is not approved and our membership is refused in the International Trade Organization? Do you think that will help this country in international trade, or will it hurt it?

Mr. KAUFFMAN. Do you mean if we were not to join the International Trade Organiaztion?

Mr. FULTON. That is right.

Mr. KAUFFMAN. I believe it would be a definite blow for this country if we were not to join the International Trade Organization, if such an organization were to be created.

Now, that question really has two barrels to it, in other words.

First of all, we are certainly in favor of the creation of this organization and we regard it as a condition precedent practically to the creation of the organization, that the United States should be a member of it. An organization of this type must have a leader. Whether it is a leader in fact or a leader spelled out in legal terminology is not important. The question there is that some country is going to take the leadership of going toward a free world or a closed-door world. If the United States takes the lead, and it would seem to be the obvious nation to take that lead, it will once again be in the van of nations. which hold out hope for other countries and for cooperation between countries, so that we can go together for prosperity.

Secondly, over and above the ratio decided of leadership, and the strength and friendship that leadership brings, we believe that it is economically wise and proper for the United States to join the ITO. Mr. FULTON. Do you, as the representative of the progressive and intelligent young businessmen of the country, want this committee to approve the bill authorizing the membership of the United States in the International Trade Organization Charter, in order that the United States can fulfill its role of leadership in the world?

Mr. KAUFFMAN. That is correct.