Images (51)
Document
| id |
id
75849809
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 517/16/53 - neel. - p.1
DA. Last night we talked, I think, about the North Atlantic Treaty, the negotia-
tion of that. One or two others matters we might/s peak about in regard to the ratifi-
cation of the hearings before the Senate Committee, and then go on to the C.F.M. and
some other matters.
The hearings on the ratification of the North Atlantic Treaty began on the 27th
of April with my appearance before the Senate Committee. Before that I had had two
talls at the White House about this legislative program. One was on April 13--dis-
cusssion with Charlie Murphy in which he said it was the President's tentative idea
to go forward with the North Atlantic Treaty and then after that had been ratified to
snnd up the military assistance program. A memorandum which I intended to bring with
me and will bring up the next time shows that we discussed that matter quite fully,
Muraphy and I, and I asked him to lay before the President the contrary view that it
would be a wise thing to send them up together, if he could, although he couldn't send
them up on the same day; but I felt sure that we were going to be asked in this North
Atlantic Treaty hearings a lot of questions about military assistance, and if you didn't
have the answers to those, if you didn't have the material before the Congress, you would
waste
a
lot of time, maybe by charges that you were holding this back until they ratified
the
treaty,
and
then
they'd
be
faced
with
a
large
bill.
The
President
decided
that
that
was the sound view, and we went to work on the arms programe It took us nruch longer--
just the sheer work of getting it together=~than we had expected, so that although the
papers were before the Congress, before they finally acted on the treaty, we were not
able to get them out as soon as tre'd hoped. On the 26th of April I had andither meeting
with the President in which I raised with him the problem which I thought would con-
front us in the Senate. The treaty provided for the accession of new members by the
uanimous consent of the signatory powers and I lonew we were going to be asked
assessed?
how the consent of the U.S. was going to be expressed: did it require the advice and
consent of the Senate? I recommended to the President that we should take the view
that it did require the action of the Senate and that we should say that the accession
Relations
belongs_to
belongs_to