Dateline: United Nations; 7

The following program is from NET. The National Educational Television Network. Good evening. I'm James Fleming. No reporter, at least of all one from this country, can work for long at the United Nations without becoming acquainted with the American mission.

Despite the changes and growth in the UN itself, the United States remains the biggest and most enthusiastic adherent of the UN, not only in terms of economic support, but in terms of influence on policy and opinion here. And so this week our program is devoted to an introduction to some of the principal members of the U.S. mission to the United Nations. Ambassador Arthur Goldberg, of course, heads of the mission as United States permanent representative to the UN. He speaks here for the President, and his Presence at Assembly Meeting Security Council sessions, or simply diplomatic ceremonies, represents the official presence of the United States. Mr. Justice Goldberg, as he prefers to be called, has been on the job for several months now and has made a number of changes in the mission. For one thing, he's made a policy of keeping leaders of public opinion and form personally of events here. In lighter moments, Ambassador Goldberg has built a reputation for a folksier touch in his relations with other diplomats than did his predecessor, Adley Stevenson.

In a more serious vein, he's already recognized as a tough negotiator who sometimes ignores protocol in his blunt approach to other ambassadors, and who often works behind the scenes, as well as in open council sessions. The mission itself is just across the street from the UN, a 12-story building representing an annual investment of more than one-and-one-half million dollars. Like any other American embassy, it's more or less self-contained, with its own offices, dining rooms, even an infirmary, and independent utilities. This is where the U.S. diplomatic staff assigned to the UN does most of its work. And 120 men and women, beginning with Ambassador Goldberg, ranging downward through secretaries, clerks, and janitors. Last week, we went over for a closer look and talked with the only second-generation ambassador at the UN. Former California Congressman James Roosevelt, who was appointed this fall to the ambassadorial post once held by his mother, the late Mrs. Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Very nice of you to come visit with me. Well, Mr. Ambassador, we're very curious about what kind of day you have here at the United States mission to the UN, and we want to find out about that from you. Mr. Ambassador, this is quite a change. Have you given up politics altogether to come here to the mission? Well, no, sir, I wouldn't say I've given up politics. I'm just in a different kind of politics. Of course, in a way, it's very much the same. Of course, you're dealing with different groups of people just as you do in a district when you represent it. In a district, I'm a Democrat, but I have to represent Republicans and Independents, Conservatives and Liberals. And so it is really here, except here the groups are more geographically located, or they come from Africa, or they come from Asia, or they come from Latin America, or, of course, they're the socialist countries. And it's a question of trying to work together to get, if you can, a consensus, and at the same time, to get your point across to the majority, and the majority in this instance, of course, being the Latin Americans, the Asians, and the Africans.

So it's a political game, but it's not a partisan political game. Mr. Roosevelt, in dealing with your new constituency, I wonder if you describe a busy day here at the U.S. mission at the UN, a very busy day, let's say. Well, frankly, every day is a busy day. We usually start about a quarter to nine, and from a quarter to nine till about a quarter to nine, we try to catch up on all the information that has come in and messages from all over the world. That gives you a general picture of what has happened overnight. Then at a quarter past nine, I usually have a little staff meeting of the particular section, which I have responsibility. Then we meet with Ambassador Goldberg, all of the permanent representatives here, and sometimes with some of the rest of the staff. And at nine thirty, we meet in the Ambassador's office on the 11th floor, and this goes on from anywhere from a half an hour to sometimes 45 minutes. Then we rush downstairs, try to pick up any messages that have come in, and for 15 minutes,

we clear the desk if we can. And we go across the street to the United Nations building itself, where we usually begin either caucuses of different groups or we go into committee meetings, directly into committee meetings. We'll go on until about one o'clock, or usually a few minutes past one o'clock. Then you break for lunch. And our job usually is to take somebody to lunch, who perhaps will be willing to listen to us and to who we can explain our point of view. I started to say it's almost like lobby, because you start to try to lobby people to convince them of your country's position. One at three o'clock, the committee usually reconvenes, and it can be anywhere from five thirty to six thirty. We've met as late as seven or seven thirty, unless there's a night meeting, in which case it might break a little earlier for dinner, and then we'd come back for night meeting. But the normal time is to break around six thirty.

I come back here to the office, I try to do the mail, I try to then send reports as back to Washington, as to what has happened during the day. This let's the State Department have a picture of what has been going on here in your particular area. The meantime, I've got to see people who are in town who want to talk to you, or perhaps the ambassador, Justice Goldberg wants to have a little meeting to talk about developments from preparations for the next day. We usually get the staff together for a little quick meeting to make sure that we've got everything lined up for the next day, but lucky if we get home at half past eight. Well, it sounds like a long day. Mr. Ambassador, of course, the focus of your interest to work here at the UN is the Economic and Social Council. I wonder if you describe that for us. What's the Economic and Social Council? Of course, is the council that takes in all the activities of the United Nations outside of the peacekeeping area and the Holy Political Area. In the Economic and Social Council come all your matters that relate to the developing nations, trying to give them the pre-investment material that they need to properly be prepared

to take on the job of building factories or creating employment, and at the same time also developing their agricultural potentialities. Because we all know that we can't continue to feed them from one place, if they can feed themselves as much as possible, this is going to make them much more self-reliant. In turn, of course, we have to always remember that no developing country can do this without an educated people. So we deal in all the whole area of education, and we're starting pretty much from scratch in many, many areas with this. To this, you have to add the problems of training technical people, because, again, there's no point building a factory if people don't know how to run it. So again, we have to be sure that in all what looks like the potential things that this country ought to be doing, that we're building a technically competent people who can handle the problem.

We have to build their natural resources. We have to make sure that their electric power is there, even if it comes maybe from a neighboring nation, as is true, for instance, in Southeast Asia. There are many other things, of course, disease, health control, things of these kinds. All of these fit into the whole area of the Economic and Social Council. I would add just one other one, because it's been quite a bit in the news. There's also what is well known as unicef, and unicef, of course, is the children's fun. Many people think of children as simply being a question of keeping them alive after they're born, and that's important because, in some countries, it takes a mother to actually have to have five children in order to have one child reach the age of 15, which is a pretty horrifying thing in our day and generation. But on the other hand, some of these other children might get born and might stay alive, but they would be crippled, so they would not be able to develop their potentialities, because of the lack of food, because of the lack of education, or whatever it might be. So all these areas really dovetail, and they must be made to work together, to coordinate

in order to save every penny that we can and use it in a useful and effective manner. Mr. Roosevelt, this is the constructive side of the United Nations. I think most people really hope with all their hearts works well throughout the world, but aren't we just now at the UN and the rather financial bind? What capability does the United Nations have now of achieving many of these humanitarian and necessary tasks? Well, the United Nations gets its money really in two ways. One, the regular budget, which is set up a year at a time, and which is assessed amongst the various nations. There's not too much trouble in this, because the charter pretty well says that the General Assembly shall pass on the budget, and then that in turn each nation will pay its proportionate share as the General Assembly has decided. Of course, we get in trouble on the peacekeeping functions, and that's where we're having the biggest troubles right now. Should, for instance, on a peacekeeping job in the Congo, should the French, or should

the Russians have to pay for it if they don't believe we've done a good job there or belong there. Similarly, however, on the other side, there are what we call voluntary funds, funds to which each nation pledges a certain amount of money, and then the funds work upon the result of those pledges. Now these funds, of course, are not permanent. They are pledged from one year to the next year. So again, it's pretty hard to build up a long-range program knowing you've got to sell your product every year to all of the nations. So the fiscal problems are great, but if I may indulge for a moment in a little dream, I believe that we can improve this situation. And I proposed it the other day, and I'm sort of a propagandizing for it because I don't believe that any government or semi-governmental agency is any different from a private enterprise. It must be sure of its income. So I hope that we can take this large world of hours, recognize that two-thirds of it is underwater, and recognize that under that water, on the floor of the ocean, there

are the greatest mineral resources in the world. There are more things from which food, for instance, can be derived to feed people in the world. And if the United Nations could own those international waters, apart from the regular coastal waters that belong to different nations, then it could be developed for the purpose of supplying revenue and capital that would belong to the United Nations itself. It would have its income, it wouldn't have to go begging to various countries, and at the same time, it could provide resources and things that all the countries of the world need. I'm working hard on it, and I've got to have very shortly a little committee to work on the practical aspects of this. So we'll have, I hope, a very interesting and wonderful program to present before too long. Mr. Roosevelt, as you take over your duties here at the mission, you must very often think of your distinguished mother who served for so many years at the United Nations. Well, you know, of course, I do think about it very often. My father, of course, the last time I saw him alive, which was on an inauguration day

in 1945, spoke to me about joining him in San Francisco for the opening of the United Nail, the signing of the United Nations Charter. Of course, he died before this actually took place. So I had a general concept of what he had dreamed about and hoped for. And as you know, President Truman appointed my mother to, as a delegate to the United Nations, she served on the Human Rights Commission as its chairman when it made its declaration on human rights. And I used to come to visit here in New York, coming from California, and see my mother working on the various delegates in what I think is the most effective way. You know, they have a way here of giving social parties, cocktail parties, and things of this kind, and they're the bane of anybody's existence, because actually the way to get to know people is to get to know them informally. And my mother used to get, oh, maybe ten or a dozen people together from different countries and invite them to her house, and then they'd all sit around on the floor.

She too, or the floor, everybody on the floor. And there they would begin to relax and talk about their hopes, talk about, and she could in turn talk to them about what was practical and not practical. But I think that this kind of informal give and take is really what the United Nations is all about. If we can get understanding of each other's problems and lose the distrust of each other, or perhaps where we should have a little, shall I say, question as to the sincerity of somebody, it will come out in this kind of meeting, because you can't fool somebody in that close kind of relationship. So I personally, of course, have had the back, this background, and have had the opportunity of seeing how well it could be done. I only hope I could do it half as well. Well, from now on, Mr. Roosevelt, will you be concentrating just on diplomacy? Well, of course, only the future can tell that you know that this kind of appointment has no tenure to it at all. You can be fired tomorrow morning if the President doesn't like what you're doing, or the way you're doing, or if my boss, Justice Goldberg, does like what I'm doing.

Of course, I wouldn't be around very long, but I must say that this work is very fascinating. I enjoy it tremendously. It's a great challenge. I think it's a great opportunity, and I'd like to stick to it just as I stayed 11 years in Congress if I can stay here a long time. Maybe I'll be able to really get some of these things done. Two active congressmen are also on the roster of the United States Mission this year, both members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. These assignments rotate between the House and the Senate, and this year it is the turn of the House. The Republican is Congressman Peter Frieding-Eisen of New Jersey, and acknowledged specialists in UN financial affairs. He took time out between UN Political Committee meetings last week to discuss his role here. Congressman Frieding-Eisen as a Republican, how do you relate to a Democratic delegation here at the UN? Well, there hasn't... I don't think there's been any problem that I've faced specifically as a Republican, speaking for a Democratic administration to begin with, I don't think that foreign policy

lends itself too easily to partisan points of view, and certainly the problems that I've been dealing with do not. In fact, my statement on the United States position with respect to the 1966 budget, if anything sounded like a good Republican position, we have a very good working relationship, I think. What is interesting to me, and what I find possibly a conflict of interest, so to speak, is that I am a member of the legislative branch participating in part of the executive branch operations. In other words, I am a participant in the development and execution, the articulation of a United States foreign policy. It's an interesting angle, because usually where bystanders looking on sometimes somewhat critically at what the administration is doing in this area. And of course, this is true participation, because it's not just an honorary position on your point.

No, no. It's a three-month full 11-hour day and a five-day week, so four or five days, I'm glad to say. It's very definitely an active kind of participation. It does broaden our horizons and give us an experience, which I think will be valuable in our work on the Foreign Affairs Committee. Congresswoman Feeding Heisen, isn't your specialty here with the delegation about budget and financing of UN matters? Well, I shouldn't really say that I can qualify yet as a specialist. Of course, the politician has to be a specialist on almost any subject that he's asked about. But my major areas of interest here at the United Nations is on the administrative and budget committee, the so-called Fifth Committee, and that does give us an exposure to the financial condition, which remains serious. The fact that the United Nations is functioning normally this year results from the United States decision not to press action on Article 19, which deprived the liquid nations of a vote if they are two years behind in the payment of dues.

We decided not to press on that issue, but the problem is that those bills are still unpaid. The Secretary-General estimates that the United Nations needs about $100 million in order to acquire that, because the mandatory assessments are not being paid by the France and the Soviet Union of the major countries. There has been an appeal for voluntary contributions. The sad part about that is that only about 15 countries have put up some $20 million to cover $100 million in unpaid debts. So we do have a very serious problem, and the specific operations that the UN is also responsible for are also, in many cases, running deficits. And so far, there has been no clear-cut decision made as to how to raise the money. We did authorize, Congress did authorize, the purchase by the United States of the United Nations bonds a few years ago.

The Soviet Union amongst others claim that these are illegal expenses and should not be part of the regular budget to be paid for by assessing all the member nations. So even that money is not being collected or the amortization and interest on that money is not being collected from all the member states. So we're faced with a very serious problem, which is getting no better. And so far, there has not been any great demonstration of cooperation on the part of delinquent nations to overcome this financial deficit. As a Congressman, Mr. Feeling Eisen, what's your estimate of the sentiment about the United Nations in the House of Representatives today? Well, I think that there's been general acceptance of the importance of the United Nations to the United States. And we show that repeatedly by providing money to finance major United States contributions to various programs and to the regular budget of the United Nations. There was a resolution passed recognizing that there had been achievements in the first 20 years of the existence of the United Nations.

At the same time, there is a continuing restiveness on the part of many members of Congress who are still willing to continue to express their faith in the UN in the kinds of problems that are still unfinished, financial problems, I think, are one of the major weaknesses. If there is not some solution found of this, there may be a loss of confidence, a loss of feeling that we should continue to contribute as much as we have, because of the unwillingness of others to support these necessary operations. These operations, in theory, at least should be as necessary to the other member nations as they are in the United States. And it's conceivable that we'll lose our patience and perhaps our present faith. So far, I think, congressional sentiment is pretty strongly in support with, of course, vocal opposition. We know that congressmen are rarely inhibited in their speeches and public statements. How do you find it here at the UN?

Do you find that you can speak out quite freely as a diplomat? I speak here at the United Nations as the spokesman for the United States, and it would be impossible for me to ad-lib as freely as I would as an individual member of Congress. The United States has such tremendous influence. It contributes so much that what we say or what we do not say, the way in which we respond to situations, is watched by all the other member nations. So we are very careful to try to guard our tongues, to say things accurately and perhaps not speak to aggression. Our role in many cases may be behind the scenes. It's been a revelation to me, of course, on every committee, all 117 member nations sit, and they have the right to speak equally. And in many cases, they do, and the small nations may be only too anxious to tweak someone's tail. It may well be the United States. But generally speaking, I think there is a realization that our aims are the same as the aims of the majority of the nations in the United Nations.

It's been quite an experience, because some of these new countries are quite small for it mildly. The Maldives Islands in the Indian Ocean is a new member nation. It has a population of about 90,000 individuals, which is about one-fifth the size of my own congressional district. And to reconcile that difference, that disparity in size and strength and population in an international organization is quite an achievement. And yet it is being done. I think our interests are pretty generally being forwarded in the United Nations, in spite of the possibility that the small countries could gang up on the big ones and make them do something we don't want to. The Democrat from Congress assigned to the United Nations this year is the oldest delegate at this General Assembly, 83-year-old Barat O'Hara of Illinois. He is also chairman of a House subcommittee on African Affairs, and he has made that his special province at the United Nations.

Mr. Chairman, have you been working closely with African delegates here at the UN? Yes, I have an affection for the Africans. For a number of years I have been chairman of the African subcommittee of the House Committee of Foreign Affairs. From President Kennedy was in the Senate. He was chairman of the African subcommittee on the Senate side, but he was running for the presidency, so he largely turned over to me for that period, you know. And I know so many of the Africans. Now I noticed it yesterday, Ghana, the representative Ghana, spoke against our position as regards Red China. That doesn't mean that in Ghana there isn't a great friendship for the United States. I think I know.

And I regard the president of Ghana as one of my close personal friends, and I have confidence in him. When they were attacking the president of Guinea, some people said spaces that he was going, I never had any doubt as to where he stood, which subsequently proved. He never would have caught me. Now when an African country takes a little help, from Russia, from Red China, and to take a little help from us, I don't know that they're doing much, that we didn't do when we were in a young country. We didn't want to get mixed up in the quarrels with the world powers, and we wanted to get what little help we'd get from anyone who wanted to help us out. So I don't get concerned when we hear that Red China has given a little money, or Russia has given a little money. Do you think then that American policy should be paying more attention to Africa than say the far east?

I do not think that our interest economically or politically is in the Pacific far away. The president, too, fighting over that, has no bearing upon it. We're there because, if we retreat, then our allies and the world's lost confidence that we've taken the position there. But I don't think that we ever intend to build up much of an interest in the far Pacific. Here we have it home, in a room backyard, Africa and South America. They produce coffee and other staple products. And I think the United States, we can't do it immediately now, but we've eventually didn't do it, is to stapleize the world markets for the products of Africa and Latin America. We've caused a lot of money, stabilizing our own agricultural prices in this country.

But we've got to reach out. This is our backyard. And we've got to take care of it. Do you feel that the growing African presence here at the United Nations is strongly affecting the course of action at the UN? No question about it. No question about it. No, I've always said to my friends in Africa, and I've said it publicly. I do not want the Africans to vote as a block. I don't want them to vote on every issue with us. Of course, I don't want them to be with the other side. I want the Africans to come here, making a contribution, each African, but we've got so many problems in the world. We want individual brains working. And if you just lose a block, nobody does it. You're thinking except for the one who originates, what you're going to do, and generally that's

wrong. But you get people individually thinking and acting and voting, when you're getting some occasion. One more question, Mr. O'Hara. Will your term as delicate here make any change in your attitude toward the United Nations as a congressman? No, no, because I've always been the friend and the champion of the United Nations, but I can be a more effective friend and champion, because of my experience here and the intimate knowledge that I have come to possess of the United Nations. Yes, I can help much better. Those are some of the principal figures representing the United States here. Of course, there are many others. Charles Yosef, the Deputy Permanent Representative, Dr. James Nebrett, the President of Howard University, Mrs. Eugenia Anderson, who's away from the UN just now and a visit to Pacific territories and many others.

And they're backed up by squads of foreign service officers specializing in political affairs, protocol, and even public relations. You know, it's one of the largest individual diplomatic staffs at the UN, and it has a proportional impact on affairs here, after all, our share in the UN's budget is the largest of any nation, and our influence day in, day out, perhaps still, is the greatest of any nation sitting in the General Assembly. This is James Fleming for National Educational Television. Thank you, and good night. This is NET, the National Educational Television Network.

Thank you.