Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-pfhbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T16:00:27.193Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The North Atlantic Treaty in the United States Senate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Richard H. Heindel ,
Thorsten V. Kalijarvi  and
Francis O. Wilcox
Richard H. Heindel
Affiliation:
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Thorsten V. Kalijarvi
Affiliation:
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Francis O. Wilcox
Affiliation:
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In joining the North Atlantic Treaty the United States made a momentous decision in its foreign policy. This article undertakes to analyze the rôle of the United States Senate in this historic step and to summarize the more important issues encountered.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , October 1949 , pp. 633 - 665
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1949

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See particularly the following documents: Documents Relating to the North Atlantic Treaty, S. Doc. No. 48, 81st Cong., 1st Bess.; U. S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings on the North Atlantic Treaty, three parts; U. S. Senate, Report of the Committee on Foreign Relations on the North Atlantic Treaty, Executive Report No. 8; Congressional Record, Daily Edition, Feb. 15, March 4 and July 5 through July 21, 1949; Committee on Foreign Relations, Report to accompany 8. Res. 239, 80th Cong., 2nd Sess., May 19, 1948, Senate Report No. 1361.

2 Since the time sequence is of considerable interest, a summary chronology is given : Feb. 14, 1949, brief Senate debate on proposed treaty; Feb. 18 and March 8, Secretary Acheson meets with the Foreign Relations Committee in informal executive sessions to discuss draft of Treaty; March 18, Treaty is made public; April 4, Treaty is signed; April 12, Treaty transmitted to the Senate; April 21, Committee meeting to consider relationship of Treaty to the Military Assistance Program; April 27, sixteen days of public hearings begin; June 2 and 6, executive sessions of the Committee; and June 6, 1949, Treaty reported unanimously to the Senate.

3 Article 51: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.”

4 Hearings, Pt. I, pp. 22, 30, 94.

5 Cf. Mr. Bevine’ remark in Parliament: “The Treaty is not a regional arrangement under Chapter VIII of the Charter. “See also the Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the French National Assembly, No. 7849, pp. 21-24.

6 Article 3 reads : “In order more effectively to achieve the objectives of this Treaty, the Parties, separately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.”

7 During the hearings Secretary Acheson stressed the concept of “honest judgment.” “The judgment of the executive branch of this Government,” he said, “is that the United States can and should provide military assistance to assist the other countries in the pact to maintain their collective security. The pact does not bind the Congress to reach that same conclusion, for it does not dictate the conclusion of honest judgment. It does preclude repudiation of the principle or of the obligation of making that honest judgment. Thus, if you ratify the pact, it cannot be said that there is no obligation to help. There is an obligation to help, but the extent, the manner, and the timing is up to the honest judgment of the parties.” Hearings, Pt. I, p. 13.

8 Congressional Record, July 11, 1949, p. 9371.

9 Congressional Record, July 21, 1949, p. 10078.

10 Congressional Record, July 6, 1949, p. 9068.

11 The Watkins reservation reads as follows:

“The United States understands and construes Article 5 of the Treaty as follows :

“That the United States assumes no obligation to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area or to assist any other party or parties in said area, by armed force, or to employ the military, air, or naval forces of the United States under article 5 or any article of the treaty, for any purpose, unless in any particular case the Congress, which under the Constitution, has the sole power to declare war or authorize the employment of the military, air, or naval forces of the United States, shall by act or joint resolution so provide.

“The United States further understands and construes article 5 to the effect that in any particular case or event of armed attack on any other party or parties to the treaty, the Congress of the United States is not expressly, impliedly, or morally obligated or committed to declare war or authorize the employment of the military, air, or naval forces of the United States against the nation or nations making said attack, or to assist with its armed forces the nation or nations attacked, but shall have complete freedom in considering the circumstances of each case to act or refuse to act as the Congress in its discretion shall determine.”

13 Hearings, Pt. I, pp. 10, 89.

14 Congressional Record; July 6, 1949, p. 9071; see also ibid., July 7, 8, 13 and 18.

15 See Congressional Record, May 27, 1949, pp. 7079-81 ; also ibid., July 6, 1949, p. 9076 ; July 14, 1949, p. 9639.

16 Hearings, Pt. I, p. 26. The French committee noted in detail this point of view and accordingly recommended the insertion of the following language in the French law authorizing ratification: “L’accord prévu à l’article 10 du Traité, en vue d’inviter un État non Partie ă ce Traité à y accéder, ne pourra être donné par le Président de la République s’il n’y est autorisé par une loi.”

17 Hearings, Pt. I, p. 202.

18 The text reads : “The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of this treaty with the understanding that such ratification shall not be construed as a commitment to underwrite the consequences of any secret agreement entered into with any foreign country without the advice and consent of the Senate.”

19 The text reads : “The Senate advises and consents to the ratification of this treaty with the understanding that any state, any part of the territory of which is contiguous to territory of a state which is a party to this treaty, may become a party thereto upon its own initiative and without the consent of the other parties by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States.”

20 Congressional Record, July 11, 1949, p. 9385; ibid., July 13, 1949, p. 9545.

21 See Secretary Acheson’s letter to Senator Connally, Congressional Record, July 21, 1949, pp. 10112-10113.

22 Cf. Senator Vandenberg’s comment on S. Res. 239: “Indeed, I would not know what I was asking for on that historic day last June if this Pact is not it.” Congressional Record, July 6, 1949, p. 9071.