help end hunger and malnutrition in certain areas of suffering in our own hemisphere.35

(d) This administration is expanding its food-for-peace program in every possible way.36 The product of our abundance must be used more effectively to relieve hunger and help economic growth in all corners of the globe. And I have asked the director of this program to recommend additional ways in which these surpluses can advance the interests of world peace-including the establishment of world food reserves.

(e) An even more valuable national asset is our reservoir of dedicated men and women-not only on our college campuses but in every age group who have indicated their desire to contribute their skills, their efforts, and a part of their lives to the fight for world order. We can mobilize this talent through the formation of a National Peace Corps, enlisting the services of all those with the desire and capacity to help foreign lands meet their urgent needs for trained personnel.37 (f) Finally, while our attention is centered on the development of the non-Communist world, we must never forget our hopes for the ultimate freedom and welfare of the Eastern European peoples. In order to be prepared to help reestablish historic ties of friendship, I am asking the Congress for increased discretion to use economic tools in this area whenever this is found to be clearly in the national interest. This will require amendment of the Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act 38 along the lines I proposed as a member of the Senate, and upon which the Senate voted last summer.39 Meanwhile, I hope to explore with the Polish Government the possibility of using our frozen Polish funds on projects of peace that will demonstrate our abiding friendship for and interest in the people of Poland.

Third, we must sharpen our political and diplomatic tools-the means of cooperation and agreement on which an enforceable world order must ultimately rest.

40

(a) I have already taken steps to coordinate and expand our disarmament effort to increase our programs of research and studyand to make arms control a central goal of our national policy under my direction. The deadly arms race, and the huge resources it absorbs, have too long overshadowed all else we must do. We must prevent that arms race from spreading to new nations, to new nuclear powers, and to the reaches of outer space. We must make certain that

35

37

29

See the unnumbered titles, post, pp. 343 and 351.

See post, doc. 642.

See post, docs. 650-652.

39 Text in American Foreign Policy, 1950-55: Basic Documents, pp. 3101-3105. See S. 1697, 86th Cong., introduced Apr. 15, 1959. The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 49 to 40, taken Sept. 12, 1959, and was referred to the House of Representatives. The House took no action on the bill.

At the request of President Kennedy Feb. 21, 1961 (see the Department of State Bulletin, Mar. 27, 1961, p. 444), S. 1215, 87th Cong. (text ibid., pp. 444-445), was introduced Mar. 7. The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 43 to 36, taken May 11, 1961, and was referred to the House of Representatives. The House took no action on the bill.

40 See post, doc. 549.

our negotiators are better informed and better prepared to formulate workable proposals of our own and to make sound judgments about the proposals of others.

I have asked the other governments concerned to agree to a reasonable delay in the talks on a nuclear test ban, and it is our intention to resume negotiations, prepared to reach a final agreement with any nation that is equally willing to agree to an effective and enforceable treaty.41

(b) We must increase our support of the United Nations as an instrument to end the cold war instead of an arena in which to fight it. In recognition of its increasing importance and the doubling of its membership

-we are enlarging and strengthening our own mission to the U.N. -we shall help insure that it is properly financed.

-we shall work to see that the integrity of the office of the SecretaryGeneral is maintained.

-And I would address a special plea to the smaller nations of the world to join with us in strengthening this Organization, which is far more essential to their security than it is to ours-the only body in the world where no nation need be powerful to be secure, where every nation has an equal voice, and where any nation can exert influence, not according to the strength of its armies but according to the strength of its ideas. It deserves the support of all.

(c) Finally, this administration intends to explore promptly all possible areas of cooperation with the Soviet Union and other nations "to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors." 42 Specifically, I now invite all nations-including the Soviet Union-to join with us in developing a weather prediction program, in a new communications satellite program, and in preparation for probing the distant planets of Mars and Venus, probes which may someday unlock the deepest secrets of the universe.

Today this country is ahead in the science and technology of space, while the Soviet Union is ahead in the capacity to lift large vehicles into orbit. Both nations would help themselves as well as other nations by removing these endeavors from the bitter and wasteful competition of the cold war. The United States would be willing to join with the Soviet Union and the scientists of all nations in a greater effort to make the fruits of this new knowledge available to all, and, beyond that, in an effort to extend farm technology to hungry nations, to wipe out disease, to increase the exchanges of scientists and their knowledge, and to make our own laboratories available to technicians of other lands who lack the facilities to pursue their own work. Where nature makes natural allies of us all, we can demonstrate that beneficial relations are possible even with those with whom we most deeply disagree, and this must someday be the basis of world peace and law.

41

42

See post, doc. 571.

Quotation from the President's inaugural address, supra.

V.

I have commented on the state of the domestic economy, our balance of payments, our Federal and social budget, and the state of the world. I would like to conclude with a few remarks about the state of the executive branch. We have found it full of honest and useful public servants, but their capacity to act decisively at the exact time action is needed has too often been muffled in the morass of committees, timidities, and fictitious theories which have created a growing gap between decision and execution, between planning and reality. In a time of rapidly deteriorating situations at home and abroad, this is bad for the public service and particularly bad for the country; and we mean to make a change.

I have pledged myself and my colleagues in the Cabinet to a continuous encouragement of initiative, responsibility, and energy in serving the public interest. Let every public servant know, whether his post is high or low, that a man's rank and reputation in this administration will be determined by the size of the job he does, and not by the size of his staff, his office, or his budget. Let it be clear that this administration recognizes the value of dissent and daring, that we greet healthy controversy as the hallmark of healthy change. Let the public service. be a proud and lively career. And let every man and woman who works in any area of our National Government, in any branch, at any level, be able to say with pride and with honor in future years: "I served the United States Government in that hour of our Nation's need."

For only with complete dedication by us all to the national interest can we bring our country through the troubled years that lie ahead. Our problems are critical. The tide is unfavorable. The news will be worse before it is better. And while hoping and working for the best, we should prepare ourselves now for the worst.

We cannot escape our dangers-neither must we let them drive us into panic or narrow isolation. In many areas of the world where the balance of power already rests with our adversaries, the forces of freedom are sharply divided. It is one of the ironies of our time that the techniques of a harsh and repressive system should be able to instill discipline and ardor in its servants, while the blessings of liberty have too often stood for privilege, materialism, and a life of ease. But I have a different view of liberty.

Life in 1961 will not be easy. Wishing it, predicting it, even asking for it, will not make it so. There will be further setbacks before the tide is turned. But turn it we must. The hopes of all mankind rest upon us--not simply upon those of us in this Chamber, but upon the peasant in Laos, the fisherman in Nigeria, the exile from Cuba, the spirit that moves every man and nation who shares our hopes for freedom and the future. And in the final analysis, they rest most of all upon the pride and perseverance of our fellow citizens of the great Republic.

In the words of a great President 13 whose birthday we honor today,

*Franklin D. Roosevelt.

closing his final state of the Union message 16 years ago," "We pray that we may be worthy of the unlimited opportunities that God has given us."

5. THE FORMULATION OF FOREIGN POLICY: Informal Remarks Made by the Secretary of State (Rusk) Before Policymaking Officers of the Department of State, February 20, 1961 45

I am happy to have a chance to talk with my new colleagues here in the Department about some of the things that are on my mind as well as some of the things which may be on your mind early in the new administration. I suppose you are wondering what the significance of a new administration is. You haven't experienced a change of party administration since 1952, and before that not since 1932. I think the principal point is that a change in administration gives us a chance to take a fresh look at a good many of our policies, to make fresh approaches, and to see whether we are going in the direction in which we as a nation really want to go. I'm reminded that Senator [John Sherman] Cooper of Kentucky, when asked in 1952 whether he expected major new foreign policies from the then new administration, remarked that the world situation was still pretty much the same and that few major changes in policy were likely.

It is quite true that the central themes of American foreign policy are more or less constant. They derive from the kind of people we are in this country and from the shape of the world situation. It has been interesting over the years to see how, in our democratic society based on the consent of the governed, movements off the main path of the ideas and aspirations of the American people have tended to swing back to the main path as a result of the steady pressures of public opinion.

Nevertheless we are today in a highly revolutionary world situation. Change is its dominant theme. I suppose that the central question before us is how we can properly relate ourselves to these fundamental and far-reaching changes. We are seeing a world in turmoil, reshaping itself in a way which is at least as significant as the breakdown of the Concert of Europe, or as the emergence of the national states in the Western system, or as the explosion of Europe into other continents of the world some three centuries ago.

Older political forms have disintegrated. New international forms are coming into being. We are experiencing enormous pressures to achieve economic and social improvements in all parts of the world, as masses of people who have largely been isolated from currents of world opinion, knowledge, and information are coming to realize that their miseries are not a part of an ordained environment about which nothing can be done.

44

Message of Jan. 6, 1945 (H. Doc. 1, 79th Cong.; the Department of State Bulletin, Jan. 7, 1945, pp. 22-28).

45

Department of State Bulletin, Mar. 20, 1961, pp. 395-399.

We could be passive in relation to these changes and take our chances. I think the view of the new administration is that, were we to be passive, we could not expect the institutions of freedom to survive. We could undertake an active defense of the status quo. My own guess is that, were we to do that, we would be fighting a losing battle. We can, on the other hand, attempt to take a certain leadership in change itself; certainly the world is not as we should like to see it, and the world is not as peoples elsewhere find tolerable. Leadership of change is a theme which we will be wanting to talk with you about and to have you keep in mind as we go about our daily business. It may, indeed, prove to be impossible to win the so-called cold war unless we develop our thoughts, in collaboration with our friends abroad, about what kind of world we are reaching for beyond the cold war.

I think another important factor for us to consider as we move into a new period turns on the President and his attitude toward the conduct of foreign relations. We have a President with great interest in foreign affairs. We have a President who will rely heavily upon the Department of State for the conduct of our foreign relations. This will not be a passive reliance but an active expectation on his part that this Department will in fact take charge of foreign policy. The recent Executive order which abolished the Operations Coordinating Board" bore witness to the fact that the Department of State is expected to assume the leadership of foreign policy. In consequence, an enormous responsibility falls upon us here not only in developing policies but in seeing that they are carried out.

With this enlarged role in mind, I should like to make a few suggestions: What we in the United States do or do not do will make a very large difference in what happens in the rest of the world. We in this Department must think about foreign policy in its total context. We cannot regard foreign policy as something left over after defense policy or trade policy or fiscal policy has been extracted. Foreign policy is the total involvement of the American people with peoples and governments abroad. That means that, if we are to achieve a new standard of leadership, we must think in terms of the total context of our situation. It is the concern of the Department of State that the American people are safe and secure-defense is not a monopoly concern of the Department of Defense. It is also the concern of the Department of State that our trading relationships with the rest of the world are vigorous, profitable, and active-this is not just a passing interest or a matter of concern only to the Department of Commerce. We can no longer rely on interdepartmental machinery "somewhere upstairs" to resolve differences between this and other departments. Assistant Secretaries of State will now carry an increased burden of active formulation and coordination of policies. Means must be found to enable us to keep in touch as regularly and as efficiently as possible with our colleagues in other departments concerned with foreign policy.

40 See post, doc. 661.