Mr. DEL FAVERO. That is right. The Ambassador's residence is on a nice lot and it lies at the rear of the property. We are intending to put planning or proposing to put a new residence in front of that. Mr. ADAIR. Tear down the old one? Mr. DEL FAVERO. Tear down the old one. Mr. HAYS. I would say that Kabul is one of the places where it seems to me there would be justification for building staff apartments. I have never been there but from what I have been told about it, I think we could not raise too much objection to staff apartments there. Mr. ADAIR. Mr. Chairman, I would subscribe to that. Dr. Westphal and I were there in 1955. Ten years ago. I suppose conditions have not greatly improved in those 10 years. Mr. DEL FAVERO. NO. The only thing that has improved in Kabul has been the paving of streets since you were there. They have got some buses that get around town. Mrs. BOLTON. The only thing improved is what? Mr. DEL FAVERO. Streets have been paved. Mr. ADAIR. Russian equipment. Mr. DEL FAVERO. And they supply the buses also. Mr. HAYS. If there are no questions, the next country is Ceylon. CEYLON Mr. SCARRITT. Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like to ask if we can defer consideration of Ceylon here in the regular program budget because the country was declared an excess currency country by the Treasury Department in July 1955. I would like to speak about this when we talk about the dollar support item. Mr. HAYS. All right. Do you intend to go ahead with your building program with local currency? Mr. SCARRITT. Yes, sir; we would like to go ahead with the program but we would use local currency for the most part. Mr. HAYS. Take it in order and say that? Mr. SCARRITT. All right. Mr. HAYS. Talk about it in the context of the dollar item. I think we ought to determine the necessity for these buildings as we go along. Mr. SCARRITт. All right, sir. In Ceylon we are asking for $1 million construction money in 1967 to construct an office building and $90,000 to construct four staff apartments and $160,000 to construct four staff houses. Mr. HAYS. As far as I am concerned, Mr. Scarritt, anyplace you get excess currency, I am for your going ahead and building whatever you need. I realize that this shows up in the authorization as a dollar item but it is really a bookkeeping transaction. It is the Government taking money out of one pocket and putting it in another, really. I think some of the best property that we own in the world today was property that was bought or paid for or built by so-called counterpart money after the war. The Rothschild place in Paris, for example, was bought for a song and we sang it ourselves. About the only francs that the French did not get back eventually so De Gaulle could attack our currency with it was what the Congress spent and what we spent for the Rothschild property and a few other pieces of property. As far as Ceylon is concerned, if you people think you need it and you can do it with $1,250,000 of their money, money that we have that is our money in their currency, otherwise we may lose, I think we ought to go ahead and do it. I do not think the committee is going to raise too many questions about it. Mr. ADAIR. I do have one general question, Mr. Chairman. Where are these old buildings with reference to the present Embassy residence? Mr. DEL FAVERO. May I speak to that? That is about, I would say, several thousand feet, a couple blocks up from our present office building. Mr. ADAIR. With respect to the residence, where is it? Mr. DEL FAVERO. We bought it from the British. The British are right next door to us. We bought part of their site. It was sort of a club site. They were using it for enlisted men housing. We bought the site from them several years ago. Mr. ADAIR. Then I am not entirely clear. Would these four existing structures be torn down? Mr. DEL FAVERO. Are you talking about the office building? Mr. DEL FAVERO. The present office building will probably be used eventually by USIS after we get the new building constructed. Is that right? Mr. SCARRITT. Yes, sir. Mr. HAYS. You are talking about the staff housing? Mr. ADAIR. I want to talk about that in a minute. First, as to the office building, a new office building is to be constructed? Mr. DEL FAVERO. That is correct. Mr. ADAIR. The present office building is then presumably going to be turned over to the USIS? Mr. DEL FAVERO. When the new building is finished. Mr. ADAIR. On the staff housing, there are four existing houses? Mr. DEL FAVERO. Yes. Mr. ADAIR. Is it planned to tear those down? Mr. DEL FAVERO. We are going to replace them; that is right. Mr. DEL FAVERO. That is correct, Mr. Adair. Mr. MORSE. How many accommodations are there in the staff houses now? Mr. DEL FAVERO. We have four housing units in all at the present time. Mr. MORSE. Who lives there? Mr. DEL FAVERO. The staff. Usually the communications clerks, single girls. Mr. MORSE. I notice one of those pictures was a picture of the house of the naval attaché. That is one of the four buildings you are talking about? Mr. DEL FAVERO. That is the senior residence for the naval attaché. Mr. MORSE. One for the navy attaché? Mr. DEL FAVERO. One for the naval attaché and one for the senior officer. This is in addition to the four houses we are talking about. Mr. MORSE. What is going to happen to that building? Mr. DEL FAVERO. We will keep them. They are on different properties. Mr. MORSE. Do all of the people of the rank of naval attachés have housing such as this? Mr. DEL FAVERO. Yes, sir. This is based on an agreement between the Department of State and the Department of Defense which came about due to hearings in 1952 when the chairman at that time insisted that we make some provision for senior defense attaché housing. Since then each year we have budgeted about $250,000 to buy five or six houses for defense attachés around the world. They determine what the priorities are. Mr. MORSE. This comes out of your budget? Mr. DEL FAVERO. Yes, sir. Mr. MORSE. In other words, the senior naval attaché may have a quarters far superior to that of the DCM? Mr. DEL FAVERO. No, sir, we try to control that because we are authorizing the acquisitions and we insure that he does not have something better than the DCM or the ambassador but commensurate with other ranking officers in the embassy. Mr. MORSE. Do your political officers have Government-owned quarters? Mr. DEL FAVERO. In a good many posts, yes, but not in all posts. There are occasions where we will provide a house for a senior defense attaché where the political officer may not have a Government-owned residence. Mr. MORSE. You are required to provide housing for the senior military attaché at every post? Mr. DEL FAVERO. We only supply those houses where we are asked to do so in accordance with our agreement between the two departments. They will establish the priorities and we can only go at a certain rate each year. There are many places around the world where a Government-owned house for a senior defense attaché is not needed. Mr. MORSE. Could you provide for the record a list of the Government-owned housing we do have for the senior military attachés? Mr. DEL FAVERO. We can do that. (See p. 163.) Mr. FRASER. How do the attachés rank? How do they fit in the status arrangement and hierarchy in the embassy? Mr. SCARRITT. Attachés are members of the Ambassador's senior staff. Mr. FRASER. What does that mean? Mr. SCARRITT. They are comparable therefore to the chief of the political section, chief of the economic section, the chief of the consular section and the chief administrative officer. They are essentially attachés to the Ambassador, military attachés performing ceremonial and other functions. Depending on the size of the post, they are generally Navy commanders and above; in the Army and Air Force, lieutenant colonels and above, depending on the size of the post. In larger posts, the senior military attaché is a general. Mr. FRASER. In housing are they treated equally with the heads of the various divisions? Mr. SCARRITT. Yes, sir. When we acquire a residence for them we look for a property that would be equally usable by them or say the chief of the political section. In general we spend in the neighborhood of $60,000 to $70,000, depending on the real estate market. Mr. MORSE. How much? Mr. SCARRITT. Sixty to seventy thousand dollars. For example, in Mexico I was looking for a piece of property for $65,000. I didn't find it but I was looking for one which would have been for the senior military attaché. Mr. FRASER. When you say senior, that is the highest ranking? Mr. SCARRITT. Yes, sir, in that case it was a general. Mr. FRASER. Do they have substantial staffs of their own? Mr. SCARRITT. You mean military staffs? Mr. FRASER. Yes. Mr. SCARRITT. It depends again on the country and the mission. Mr. FRASER. I met a lot of attachés but I never understood what kind of staffing backs them up. Mr. SCARRITT. In my personal experience, they normally have an assistant attaché, probably a chief warrant officer, and four to five enlisted men. Mr. FRASER. How about the head of the MAAG mission; how does he mesh into this? Is he treated about at the same level? Mr. SCARRITT. I have not had any personal experience. Mr. SCARRITT. We have no responsibility for providing for the MAAG mission. Mr. FRASER. How about office space? Mr. SCARRITT. Neither one. We will frequently provide one office where the MAAG chief can come and read his classified material when he is in the embassy to visit with the ambassador. Mr. FRASER. You mean the MAAG operation is largely independent of the embassy? Mr. SCARRITT. As far as our building program is concerned, yes, sir. Mr. FRASER. That would be comparable to AID? Mr. SCARRITT. Well, we do more for AID than we do for MAAG. Our policy on AID is to provide housing for senior AID officers, the director and his immediate staff, but we have no responsibility for MAAG. Mr. DEL FAVERO. Mr. Fraser, if I may, on the complement sheets that I believe you have, it shows the staffs of each of these posts that we are speaking about. The staffs of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. I thought you would be interested in that. Mr. Chairman, if I may, in connection with Mr. Morse's question on furnishing a list of housing for defense attachés, I would like to submit for the record a list that we have here not only for defense attachés but USIS, PAO's, and the agricultural attachés. We have the same agreement with the Department of Agriculture as we have with the defense attachés but the amount of money each year is approximately $150,000, say, sufficient to provide three or four houses each year for the Department of Agriculture. Mr. Hays. We would be very happy if you will give that to the reporter. We would also like one for each member. (The tabulations follow:) |