The Assembly,
Having adopted Recommendation...,
Instructs the Political Committee to submit to it, in time for the autumn 1958 Session a detailed plan for the organisation of the study conference on aid to less developed areas mentioned in paragraph 19 of the Recommendation.
The Assembly,
Having adopted Recommendation...,
Invites the President to convene a meeting of the Joint Committee at ministerial level, preferably at the beginning of September, for the specific purpose of discussing the question of aid to less developed areas.
Explanatory Memorandum - 4
United Nations multilateral assistance (Appendix I) - 29
The Colombo Plan (Appendix II) - 34
American Foreign Aid (Appendix III) - 38
Statements by Mr. Adlai Stevenson on aid to under-developed countries (Appendix - 43
Mutual assistance between France and its Overseas Territories (Appendix V)p - 48
The association of Overseas Territories with the European Economic Community (Appendix VI) - 53
Intra-European Aid for the under-developed areas of Europe (Appendix VII) - 59
United Kingdom aid to overseas territories (Appendix VIII) - 62
Soviet aid to less developed areas (Appendix IX) - 70
The problem of less developed countries is as old as the hills. It has been the cause of most of the great invasions and, directly or indirectly, of the majority of wars.
In quite recent times, the demands of the " have-nots " in Europe have served to bolster up the imperialism of totalitarian systems desirous of expanding their country's living space.
Since the end of the last war the problem has undergone a far-reaching change. It has taken on fresh importance and significance.
The disappearance of colonialism and the accession of many Asian and African countries to independence have brought about vast changes in the world. The internal structure of the new States and their external relations have become seriously unbalanced.
The colonial Powers had contracted an ever-increasing number of obligations towards the colonial peoples, as a counterpart to the political and economic advantages which were secured. They had understood the need not only to protect them from disease and poverty, but also gradually to raise their standard of living.
It can be said that, when due allowance has been made for the diversity of natural resources and the difficulties encountered, considerable success has been achieved.
There has also been a liberal evolution in the relations between colonial Powers and the local populations which have been gradually given an increasing share of responsibility in managing their own affairs and defending their interests.
The irresistible trend, in Asia and Africa alike, towards the independence of countries previously subjected to foreign sovereignty or influence, and their consequential liberation, did more than break up the former relationship with the past. Acute problems suddenly arose which the earlier state of affairs had concealed. Satisfaction at the freedom which had been won was not a panacea, and the hard realities of government and economics forced themselves upon those who were now responsible for the affairs of their countries.
The guardians had left, but the needs remained.
In his address to the last annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund, the President, Mr. Eugene Black, said: " During the last fifteen years more than 500 million men have gained their national independence in Asia and Africa. But independence has not brought them the improvements which the peoples of the least developed countries need so badly and which they so ardently desire. The challenge is still there. And I doubt whether at any time in history leaders have ever been faced with a more difficult and exacting challenge "Note
Independence changed nothing in the situation. Sometimes it has made matters worse. Exploitation, of which the colonies claimed to be the victims, disappeared, but capital, services and business disappeared, too. The less developed countries are well aware of all this, but they are blaming it on the more developed countries.
There is a grave danger of" a rift between the wealthy and the poor countries: economically, because the difference between production techniques is so wide that the former can find practically nothing to buy from the latter and in consequence are unable to sell them anything; politically, because the poor nations are wont to impute the power of the West to colonialism and imperialism, and thus hope to conquer for themselves, by force of arms, what they believe we have ourselves acquired by force of arms "Note
This widespread opinion was publicly expressed at the Bandung Conference, which for the first time brought together all the less developed countries of Asia and Africa. It is a major problem.
For this reason, under the converging influence of contradictory idiologies, in the heated atmosphere of United Nations debates, the feeling of human partnership has been affirmed and strengthened. It has become a compelling moral obligation upon States to strive for a closer association between the more developed and the less developed countries, by means of assistance from the former to the latter.
During the last ten years, following the launching of the Marshall Plan by the United States, this trend has been so rapid that no Government would today venture to dispute the need for aid to the less developed countries.
A new doctrine is taking shape whereby it is the duty of the more prosperous countries to lend their assistance, and it is the right of the less favoured to receive it.
By general agreement countries are termed " under-developed " or " less developed " H their income and capital per inhabitant are considerably lower than those of the States of North America, Western Europe or Australia.
They are also the countries which lack the technical and scientific means to develop their agriculture and industry.
In practice the definition applies to almost all Asia apart from Japan, to almost all Africa and a large part of South America. These countries represent two-thirds of the world's population.
This general view should not blind us to the extreme diversity in the situation of individual regions. Poverty is not synonymous with backwardness in culture or civilisation. China and India are a sufficient proof of the contrary. There are less developed countries whose methods of agriculture and craftsmanship compel our admiration, and others which have clung to the most primitive forms of economy. Their peoples show the most varied characteristics. Some of them adapt themselves to our techniques, while others refuse to do so. The rate of economic development is not uniform; it depends on the natural resources of the country, geographical, physical or human features, the aptitudes of the inhabitants and the force of social or religious traditions.
There is consequently nothing more difficult than lending assistance. Some countries are quite ready to make up for lost time; all that prevents them from doing so is the lack of capital. There are others which are almost hopelessly condemned by nature to poverty and starvation. Others again are strongly opposed to our forms of civilisation, our customs and habits, and this is almost an insurmountable obstacle.
In the search for useful solutions great flexibility is therefore needed, to take account of all these different situations.
It must also be remembered that men who know nothing of our techniques cannot accept them, even for their own good, unless care is taken to persuade them of their value. All assistance will be in vain unless it is offered in a spirit of understanding and sympathy. To help, you must first inspire confidence.
If the problem posed in this way is now more closely examined, it will be seen that, contrary to a widely-held belief, humanity has not found in the accelerated development of techniques any remedies for the inequality of living conditions among different peoples.
The task has shown itself to be so vast that the progress achieved appears singularly disappointing. The most urgent question is the chronic under-nourishment of hundreds of millions of human beings—and so far it has not been solved.
The explanation of this failure, which, if it persisted, would constitute a moral condemnation of science and all its uses, is that economic progress, despite all efforts made, cannot keep pace with the growing population. As Tibor Mende writes: " Men have an incurable tendency to multiply beyond the point at which there is sufficient food for them all. " The increase in the birth-rate and the decrease of the death-rate, both fostered by better hygiene, have in fact aggravated a situation which the increase in production has been too slow to offset.
In assisting the less developed countries we must therefore distinguish between over-populated and sparsely populated countries. Whereas in the latter case economic progress can, within a reasonable time, be accelerated so as to outstrip the population growth, the former case calls for much greater and more sustained efforts.
Thus two distinct types of solution are called for.
Some solutions, which would involve relatively small-scale resources, may be suitable for countries that are still thinly populated, but will apparently be ineffectual in over-populated countries.
Here the immensity of the task would daunt the stoutest heart: but it is essential that large-scale action, both in the material and psychological fields, should be taken, and this implies an immense effort in international co-operation.
In thinly-populated countries, on the other hand, assistance may be a matter for a single State or a fairly small number of States. This is a consideration which is of paramount importance for the present study.
The foregoing general considerations must be supplemented by another, which is entirely political.
All observers have been struck by the danger that, if no effective assistance is given to the less developed countries, particularly those which are over-populated, there may be social upheavals, with incalculable consequences in a shrinking world where bonds of sympathy between nations grow daily stronger.
The danger has been apparent to all the political leaders of the free nations. In the United States, in particular, where foreign aid has reached considerable proportions, there can be no doubt that this gesture of human solidarity is closely linked with the desire for greater national security.
It is obvious that Communism finds a boundless field for expansion in the less developed countries, especially the over-populated areas of South and South-east Asia.
In these countries, which have more feeling for national independence than for individual freedom, totalitarianism is accepted in advance, whatever the discipline and sacrifices it demands, if it can deliver the peoples from their poverty and ensure them their daily bread.
South and South-east Asia, with its 600 million inhabitants, would seem to be Communism's inevitable prey unless the free nations do something to prevent it.
The Americans have come to realise the gravity of this situation. Some of them consider that, in modern international politics, the problem of assistance is as important as military supremacy. Mr. Stevenson has recently publicly reaffirmed this in a number of statements and articlesNotewhich made a considerable impression.
The British, too, showed that they understood it when they started the Colombo Plan, which associates the more prosperous Commonwealth countries and the U. S. A. with the poorer and, as far as democracy is concerned, unstable countries of South-east Asia.
Europe must be alive to this problem.
The same feeling which causes her to unite against the political and military challenge of the Soviet Union should therefore lead her to take common action to prevent all Africa and Asia from falling under the Communist sway and overthrowing the stronghold of our liberties by their very mass.
Leaving aside the political dangers, what would become of Europe, whose economy is based on industrial specialisation and free trade, if her factories were deprived of raw materials or had to pay for them at arbitrarily imposed prices ?
What would become of her workers' standard of living if foreign markets were barred or dictated to her ?
The fate which would then await her would be that of the satellite countries, mercilessly exploited to the point of poverty and revolt.
Free Europe needs both raw materials and markets in order to live.
Moreover, she desires that other countries shall also have the freedom she claims for herself. She considers that the independence of the new States, far from being disturbing, is essential to her own welfare. What she fears is the possibility that the freedom of these newly independent countries, which is a condition of her own existence, may be in jeopardy. She must defend it and give these States all the support in her power.
Thus the three main reasons why Europe should take common action to help the less developed countries may be summarised as:
the obligations of human fellowship ;
the safeguarding of her own economy ; and
the maintenance of political freedoms.
In view of what precedes, it appears that Europe is faced with a choice from a number of alternatives.
Clearly, because of the demands of her own high standard of living and of the obligations which she has already contracted towards her less favoured membersNoteas well as the heavy burden of defence, she can only make a limited effort to assist the less developed countries. For that very reason her choice of both ends and means must be made with care.
The choice cannot, however, be evaded.
It might be contended, in the name of a wider " sacred egoism ", that before taking action outside her own boundaries, Europe should continue her efforts to level up, so far as possible, the economic and social standards of all her component States. But this, in our opinion, is not a valid argument.
Ought we to wait ? There is no foreseeable end to the need for mutual aid. Italy, the Netherlands and France, to mention only these countries, finding that some of their regions are at a disadvantage compared with others, have undertaken to help them narrow the gap. This is a continuous task, linked with the improvement and evolution of techniques.
What is applicable to the interior of a country applies also within a solidly united Europe. To postpone action outside until everything is done " at home " would be a poor excuse for evading every external obligation.
In any case, such a negative solution is already outmoded. The facts argue against it. The Western States, each and severally, are already taking part, in varying degrees, in schemes for assistance. Some of them are devoting a large part of their resources to developing overseas countries for which they are responsible. This is the case in particular of Great Britain and France.
In his book Les chances économiques de la Communauté Franco-Africaine, M. Pierre Moussa, Director of Economie Affairs and Planning in the Ministry of Overseas France, says that total investments by France in her overseas territories represent a little under 250,000 million francs a year, most of which comes from public funds. It may be reckoned that France places about 8 % of her annual investments overseas. We must add that, in view of the needs, an appreciable increase in the standard of living would require the investment of 600,000 million francs annually, half of this sum being financed by Metropolitan France.
The implementation of the Common Market implies the association of six-Power Europe in the development of part of Africa.
Europe is thus already officially committed to assisting the less developed countries. The only question is what form her action is to take.
If the efforts made by some of the Member States are considered, as well as the task awaiting six-Power Europe, the first objective of common action has already been outlined: clearly, it is Africa.
To develop the continent which is our nearest neighbour and to improve its living standards by linking the destiny of its peoples with our own in a sustained effort of technical education and modernisation is, certainly, the most inspiring task that can be offered to Europe's rising generation. Proof of this is provided by the enthusiasm with which the youth of France is taking up the work of developing the Sahara.
The objective seems all the more to be the right one in that it will bring to the whole of Europe political and economic advantages to justify the burden it entails.
The choice then, is made, and the first stage unfolds before us.
The Governments of six-Power Europe have agreed to accomplish this stage together.
To complete it, it is necessary to take several measures.
The first should consist in a closer association of six-Power Europe with the efforts of its Members who still have African responsibilities. The second should be an extension of the action of the Six to other members of the European community. The third stage should be to extend this wider assistance to all African countries desiring it, first and foremost, those which are the most sought after in other connections and the most vulnerable, such as Sudan and Ethiopia.
It is Europe which has developed Africa, which has taught Africa the techniques of living and the most up-to-date forms of our civilisation. It is for Europe to continue in this undertaking, always provided that there is unreserved acceptance of the new conditions deriving from latter-day political transformations. Democratic Europe must needs respect and heed the freedoms that have been acquired, its actions must be harnessed to a policy of political and liberal association with African countries.
Africans are full of common sense. Their Governments have realised that any successes obtained in the political field would be nugatory if they were not accompanied by lasting economic and social progress. Their present tendency is to overdo the search for spectacular achievements in order to place their youthful prestige on a firm foundation.
Requests for assistance will be many and urgent in proportion as the needs increase.
Europe must respond to Africa's call speedily and without haggling. Only in this way will the common prosperity and security of both be assured.
The Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe has for some considerable time been aware of the importance of this question. The " Strasbourg Plan " was the outcome of these preoccupations. After much delay, the study of economic links between Europe and Africa was entrusted to a group of experts. Their work, which is of the greatest interest and embodies numerous useful suggestions, has now been examined by a Sub-committee of the Assembly's Economic Committee. Mention will be made of these studies on a later page.
Thus Africa is oviously the most appropriate target, because of its nearness, its resources in raw material and the smallness of its population, which makes effective assistance possible. Moreover, the opportunities it offers for mutual understanding and co-operation are facilitated by the political progress achieved. Should we, then, go further, or should we devote all the available resources to this single task, burdensome and absorbing as it already is ?
The question is serious and deserves reflection. Post-war Europe, from which part of Germany and the satellite countries have been lopped, which has lost most of its former overseas possessions and is simultaneously obliged to repair its ruins and ensure its defence, must cut its garment according to its cloth.
Africa is a reasonable objective, but can we go further ? Would it not be better to leave it to America, which is so much richer than we are, to help the less developed and over-populated countries of Asia ?
To suggest this is to under-rate the tragic dimensions of the problem confronting us today. While it is necessary for Europe's survival that Africa should be led to prosperity and made a partner in our technical progress, it is none the less urgent that we lend our aid to the over-populated countries of South and South-east Asia, which are the most unhappy, the most fragile and the most exposed to poverty.
Here the distinction drawn at the beginning of this report between sparsely and densely populated less developed countries appears in sharpest relief. Although European aid may be able to meet the needs of Africa, it is mani-festly far from equal to the needs of the East and Far East.
Hence the obligation for Europeans, unless they are to fail in their duty to the rest of mankind, to join their efforts with those of other nations.
The idea of a universal contribution to a plan for helping the less developed countries is not new. These countries themselves asked for it in the General Assembly of the United Nations. They have brought considerable pressure to bear, calling for the establishment of a " Special United Nations Fund for Economic Development " (SUNFED).
The Assembly gave them some satisfaction in 1952 by proposing that the Economic and Social Council should prepare a suitable plan. In 1953 a preliminary report was drafted by a group of experts, suggesting that a fund of 250 million dollars be set up. But no action was taken. A fresh attempt took place in 1954, when M. Raymond Scheyven, Chairman of the Economic and Social Council, submitted a second report setting out clearly and objectively the terms of the problem of international assistance to less developed countries. The conclusions of this latest report were less ambitious and more realistic.
In 1955 the General Assembly requested Governments to forward their views on the creation, the role, the structure and the operation of SUNFED. The United States and Great Britain maintained their initial reservations because they felt that the necessary financial support might not be forthcoming. The Federal Republic of Germany and Canada continued in their " wait and see " attitude. France, Italy, the Netherlands and Denmark expressed a favourable opinion. The Economic and Social Council, at its last meeting at Geneva, adopted a Resolution in favour of establishing the Fund. Three States, namely the United States, Great Britain and Canada, voted against the Resolution.
The last General Assembly of the United Nations finally reached an agreement. One hundred million dollars will be devoted to the establishment of an assistance fund. For the time being, however, its activities will be concerned only with technical assistance and will not extend to the financing of economic development.
The hopes placed by certain of the less developed countries in a SUNFED with ample resources aiming at the gradual establishment of economic and socal equality among all coun-tries in the world have not been fulfilled. It should be observed, however, that the General Assembly of the United Nations has decided to review the scope and activities of the Special Fund when resources prospectively available are considered sufficient to enter into the field of capital development.
It is understandable that the more prosperous States attach conditions to the grant of their assistance and are reluctant to allow an organisation in which they are in the minority to say how their money shall be spent.
The agreement reached by the United Nations Assembly is thus only a timid step towards multilateral assistance.
Europe has its part to play. It is in the interest of Europe to offer the new institution all desirable co-operation.
Even then, Europe must not be under any great illusion as to the efficacy of this move; it must not consider itself relieved thereby of any further obligation towards the Asian countries in the poverty, hunger and subversion which will otherwise be their lot.
During the past three years, the Soviet Union, the satellite countries and, on occasion, China, have undertaken to give substantial aid to the less developed countries of the Middle East and South-East Asia.
By deliberately keeping the personal standard of living relatively low, Soviet Russia retains a possibility of investment superior to that of all other countries.
Her totalitarian system means that she can make such investments at will, whenever she deems most expedient. She can grant loans to any country she chooses, without being accountable to anyone.
Her resources in heavy industry and armaments ensure that she has exceptional means of assisting or trading with the countries she approaches. The industrialisation myth that has taken hold of the latter delivers them into the Soviet Union's hands. In addition, the deficiencies of Soviet agriculture serve the Kremlin's purposes by enabling it to open a tempting market for foreign agricultural produce.
In addition, the Soviet Union has for a long time made available the services of techni-cians of all kinds, who are often trained for the attainment of political objectives.
There is already a long list of cheap loans granted by the Soviet Union to Asian States or of factories built and maintained by her.
To mention only Asia, these include steel works, pharmaceutical manufacturers and oil prospecting in India, armaments and means of transport in Afghanistan, technical assistance and " ex'change of presents " in Burma and an agreement in process of negotiation in Indonesia.
Au Moyen-Orient, l'aide militaire soviétique à la Syrie et à l'Egypte est dans tous les esprits.
In the Middle East, Soviet military aid to Syria and Egypt is well known to all.
To these countries should be added Sudan, the Yemen and Ethiopia, where Moscow's assistance has been offered either directly or through the medium of the satellite countries.
Total advances and loans granted by the Soviet Union and her satellites to the Middle East and South-east Asia during the past three years are at present estimated at nearly one thousand million dollars.
This political and economic offensive is of recent date. In the days of Stalin, the Soviet Union relied on subversion or conquest in order to extend her influence and undermine ours. Since his death, the methods have changed, even if the aims have not.
The Soviet Union renders assistance with skill and at the lowest cost, in the form of trade guaranteed by longterm contracts, low-interest long-term loans, and even outright gifts. In general she lends much more than she gives, thereby making certain of solid and lasting pledges. In general, the fact that there is a political objective is confirmed by the choice of countries where operations have so far been conducted.
For some time the Soviet Union has also been trying to develop her influence in Africa, not only in the countries bordering on the Red Sea, but in North and West Africa as well. She has just despatched a " friendship " mission to Ghana. Everywhere she is trying to expand her diplomatic and commercial relations. She multiplies her offers of economic help and technical assistance. Her action is particularly directed towards the trade unions, where she finds fertile soil. She places at their disposal research fellowships and, in this way, builds up the future hierarchy for her propaganda and political activity.
The second Afro-Asian Conference recently held in Cairo afforded Soviet Russia the opportunity to give resounding publicity to her assistance policy. On 28th December 1957 the Russian delegate declared himself "authorised to offer unconditional economic aid to all people."
Each country has only to state its needs. Russia is prepared to build for it hospitals, roads or schools, to send teachers and to receive students. This offer is made, it is said, without pecuniary motive, without rights of control, without special privileges.
The propaganda character of this sensational proposal is underlined by the encouragement given in the same speech to the Afro-Asian countries to follow the example of Egypt and Indonesia in nationalising foreign assets in their territories.
The activity of the Soviet Union has been extended to certain countries of South America. Concerted support on the part of Western countries should shield these countries from the Soviet Union's attempts at political or economic expansion.
Europe cannot possibly remain indifferent or passive in the face of such a methodical offensive which is a threat and a challenge to the West.
Since it is by means of assistance that the Soviet Union intends to pull these countries into their " economy of constraint ", assistance must be the price which we must pay for holding them within the economy of the free world.
America became aware of this danger sooner than we did, and it is noteworthy that, this year, the President of the United States has asked Congress for appropriations amounting to 780 million dollars for aid to less developed areas.
Europe in turn realises the danger, which the recent proposal of M. Giuseppe Pella, the Italian Foreign Minister — to lay down a development plan for the Near East which would serve as a basis for concerted action by America and Europe — is designed to avert.
Under this plan, it is proposed to set up a Special Fund financed by the United States and Europe for the benefit of the countries of the Middle East.
The Italian Government has also examined the possibility of finding ways and means of associating with the plan the countries which are to benefit from it.
It has suggested that a Centre could be set up, as an adjunct of the fund and adequately financed by it, providing a meeting-ground for the Western countries, on the one hand, and the Mediterranean and Middle East countries on the other.
The object of this Centre would be the study, by representatives of all the countries in question, of problems of economic development of common interest. It could serve as a pool for proposals put forward by Governments and interested private bodies, and could, moreover, promote the creation and perfection of techniques for use in the execution of the project.
Le Gouvernement italien a proposé de situer ce centre à Naples.
The Italian Government has suggested that this Centre should be located at Naples.
M. Pella's proposal is the only one which represents on the Western side a positive contribution (with details of costs) to the problem of regional multilateral aid. The object of the Russian move at the Cairo Conference was to nullify its effects upon Middle Eastern countries.
It is thus in the light of the facts of the situation, past experience, the obligations of human solidarity, economic progress and our desire to maintain freedom that we can discern the broad lines of a European policy for assisting the less developed countries.
(a) In the first place, each country must be free to take such steps as it deems suitable, in accordance with its traditions, its special economic and cultural interests, its inclinations and resources, setting its own objectives and using its own means. It is sound policy, for the common interests of Europe, to allow every State this freedom of action, thereby making it possible to compare the effectiveness of methods and results and to test the capabilities of the men who are doing the work.
But, in order to avoid possible competition and rivalry, and to save money, the aims and methods must be co-ordinated in a European framework. This object will be achieved if each country in the European Community undertakes to give a periodical account of its stewardship and timely notice of its projects, agreeing to co-ordinate them with those of neighbouring countries and to associate the other Member States with them where appropriate.
Such co-ordination is essential. It is the first step towards concerted action. By this means alone can lessons be learned from experience, providing the basis for subsequent programmes of action.
(b) If only to achieve this co-ordination, a special body ought to be set up to collect information, study all forms of assistance practised throughout the world and determine its cost and effectiveness.
Once it has been set up, this body, which we suggest might be called « European Office for Aid to the less developed Countries », should be able to establish relations with the less developed countries, receive and examine their requests, study their real needs and what guarantees are required to ensure that credits and supplies will be put to good use. In short, it should do the preparatory work to enable all subsequent action to be taken by the Member States of the European Community.
This Office might perhaps be constituted as an autonomous joint department of 0. E. E. C. and the Secretariat of the Council of Europe, which could give it valuable aidNote. It would be enabled to enter into direct relations with the Government departments of the various States and, if necessary, with the Prime Ministers.
It should also be at the disposal of the Consultative Assembly and make regular reports to it on the progress of its work. With the help of this new office, the European Community could easily pass from individual initiative to concerted action.
(c) At this new stage, it would no longer be a question only of co-ordination, but of pooling aims and resources. The Office should be authorised to extend its information work to all public or private sectors, to draw up plans and programmes and make proposals for a more rational deployment of efforts and for close co-operation in every way.
We would venture to emphasise that common assistance demands careful preparation of proposed action — and a rigorous selection of methods likely to produce the best results in any given country.
To this end the new body should have the benefit not only of the help of specialised national organisations, but of that of credit institutions, large undertakings and Government departments. It should be empowered to prepare and elaborate contracts of varying term, to be concluded with the beneficiary countries or communities and including effective methods of control.
Control of assistance is, indeed, as difficult as it is necessary. In many countries independence has rendered earlier contracts more or less void. A sensitive nationalism has accentuated mistrust of the foreigner. The new leaders now in power have not always understood the importance of reassuring countries which would be ready to make investments, or the obligation to offer them long-term guarantees. It is in Europe's interest to foster the political stability of these new States by economic and financial aid, although there must be no suspicion that such aid is a form of interference. In the present atmosphere it will not always be easy to find formulae calculated to reassure both sides.
Technical assistance presents fewer difficulties, and it is for this reason that it should be extended as much as possible.
It is probable that after a period of uncertainty and groping, the assisted countries, as they grow more conscious of their strength and their destiny, will become more amenable to the discipline of international contracts and commitments.
The best means of getting them used to this would be to persuade them, from the start, to accept the notion of arbitration by third parties or international organisations, in cases where a contract is broken or flagrantly abused. They ought not to be alarmed by this idea, as it is likely to flatter their self-esteem by emphasising the equality of the parties.
Finally, by co-ordinating all action hitherto taken in this regard, the Office should ensure the systematic training, both psychological and technical, of advisers and executives to implement aid projects.
In any scheme for helping less developed countries, men count for more than money. Many failures have occurred where both assisting and assisted have failed to understand each other. Patient and continuous education is more effective than large-scale allocations of credits or goods. We should try to benefit by the experience gained in this field by organisations such as U. N. R. R. A. or U. N. I. C. E. F.
France, in her efforts overseas, has had some successes which might be a good example to Europe in the matter of educating the peoples, particularly in the application of agricultural techniques. The Bureau pour le développement de la production agricole outre-mer has carried out interesting experiments in French West Africa and Madagascar.
The greater the powers of the Office in this connexion, the more certain it is that the suspicion of political interference will be removed from the minds of our partners. The European hall-mark must be a guarantee of sincerity and of the effectiveness of the common contribution.
(rf) Such should be, in our view, the duties and responsibilities of the " European Office for Aid to the less developed Countries." As an instrument for research and the preparation of various forms of joint assistance, it obviously could have no power of decision. It will be for the Governments to reach agreement and to take common action. This is the more important since action, as we have seen, frequently bears the stamp of political expedience.
How can Governments be convinced that they must agree to act in concert? How can they be made aware of their responsibilities? Must they be reminded that the U. S. S. R. has a centralised machine called the " Council for Mutual Economic Assistance " which inexorably directs the action of the Soviet Union and its satellites and, according to Tib or Mende, " is probably one of the most powerful control levers in the world "?
Once more, we cannot but deplore the absence of a European authority capable of determining and applying a long-term policy and providing the necessary resources and methods.
It is to be hoped that the problem of helping the less developed countries may at least serve to remove hesitations or obstacles.
In any event, the establishment of a body for European aid would be of the greatest immediate service to Governments.
The importance and dimensions of the problem of assisting less developed countries deserve the constant attention of the Consultative Assembly.
If a Special Office were set up, its obligations to report regularly to the Assembly would provide the latter with an excellent working instrument and means of information.
The appointment of a European High Commissioner for aid to less developed areas might, at the appropriate time, be considered. One member of the Political Committee has suggested that the precedent set by the nomination of M. Pierre Schneiter to the post of Special Representative of the Council of Europe for National Refugees and Over-population might be followed.
It would also be highly desirable for the Assembly to' advocate a Study Conference to examine specifically European aid to the less developed countries. The work of the United Nations Economic and Social Council and of the Group of Experts set up under the Strasbourg Plan would indicate the lines on which such questions should be examined. The Conference might be attended by all those with experience of these matters.
If the proposed special Office were speedily created, it could usefully contribute to the preparation of such a Study Conference, whose debates and conclusions should be given the widest possible publicity.
In submitting the foregoing proposals, we have tried to remain within the bounds of the immediately possible; it is self-evident that this is only a beginning and that action must be immediately and continuously extended.
If these proposals met with a favourable reception, the new Office would have to be set to work to study not only the various objectives of European assistance, which are the main subject of the present report, but also the question of resources and methods of attaining such objectives.
It is difficult to speak of resources without having defined the objectives.
Therefore this aspect of the question has so far been deliberately passed over in silence.
We would recall only that since the needs of the less developed countries are so great, it has been rightly pointed out that the necessary capital and credit cannot be found unless there is a general limitation of armaments. Unfortunately, the hopes we entertained in this direction have again receded.
But this is no reason to be sidetracked from an effort so urgently demanded of us. Help cannot be refused to people on the verge of famine. Immediate international funds could perhaps be raised by means of an addition to the common taxes on gambling, drink and tobaccoNote?
In his book mentioned above, M. Pierre Moussa states that the rich countries as a whole are providing only a quarter of the investments required for equipping the poorer countries, or 3,000 million dollars, 1,000 million dollars being private investment and 2,000 million dollars public investment in bilateral form. The contributions made by the international organisations represent barely 80 million dollars.
The author estimates that the total necessary investments from external sources is 12,000 million dollars annually.
In order to spoil the Soviet Union's chances of setting up a " Proletarian Peoples' Federation ", the rich countries will very shortly be forced, according to M. Moussa, to levy a " universal " tax proportional to each country's wealthNote.
Professor Blackett, President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, recently made a moving appeal to a gathering of scientists for a large-scale increase of investment in the less developed countries.
The methods to be used deserve attentive and detailed study. They will vary, according to individual situations. They range from bilateral loans to States for the construction of harbours and dams and the building of power-stations or pilot factories, to modest technical assistance for villages lost in the bush.
It is not possible for us to go into such a complex problem here and we will confine ourselves to two essential remarks.
(a) All the countries which recently obtained their freedom dream of guaranteeing their political independence, fragile as it still is, Joy means of economic independence. All of them are inclined to relate economic independence to industrialisation.
Thus, overlooking the consistent effort to improve agriculture, which should not only feed the people but enable them to raise their living standards by the export of raw materials or foodstuffs much in demand in the world, all the Governments asking for help talk solely of developing their industries.
The industrialisation of the less developed countries is one of the most delicate problems to solve, if regard must be paid to economic soundness.
In Western countries agriculture has formed a solid basis for the gradual development of industry in the most advanced countries. It cannot be neglected without upsetting the balance of domestic production. The increasing prosperity of the farmers leads to the installation of local consumer goods industries requiring only little capital, which is available on the spot. It may be asserted, without being paradoxical, that the best means whereby a Government can promote industrialisation is to make maximum use of its resources for increasing agricultural output and improving farming techniquesNote
par rapport aux investissements qu'ils pratiquent actuellement.
| countries | ||
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1,6 | 7,2 |
| Great Britain | 0,3 | 1,1 |
| France | 0,6 | 0,8 |
| Germany | 0,1 | 0,6 |
| Canada | 0,1 | 0,5 |
The mystique of industrialisation has obscured the economic data. The example of the Soviet Union veils the blunt fact that to feed the people and raise the living standard in over-populated countries it is not sufficient to establish new industries. The average wealth of a country is not proportionate only to its degree of industrialisation. In Brazil, Sao Paulo is a model of industrial expansion. A short distance away, human beings live in the most primitive conditions. At Port Harcourt, in Nigeria, Africans manage flourishing undertakings. Less than 100 miles away the sale of meat without skin has had to be prohibited, to prevent the consumption of human flesh.
In some countries the effect of industrialisation has already been to upset an established balance by causing an influx of people into the towns and a flight from the land. It has created a proletariat and produced the risk of unemployment, liable to foment political and social disturbances. It has distorted traditional patterns without contributing towards a general improvement in living standards.
At the same time it must be recognised that the new independent countries of Africa and Asia in general feel that the Western countries have a vested interest in their remaining exporters of raw materials. For that reason it may be unwise and even politically damaging to press this argumentation.
(b) The second observation relates to the importance of the human factor in the giving of assistance.
The fact that men count for more than money is a point in Europe's favour; although less rich than America, she is nevertheless able to make a real contribution towards helping the less developed countries. The presence of disinterested and understanding advisers often does more to improve agricultural or industrial production than the granting of loans on a massive scale. In any case the local populations must be taught how best to employ such loans. Coming from outside, the teachers will succeed in their task only if they can earn the people's confidence and if they are capable of being, in the true sense of the word, educators.
The Soviet Union has shown that it has well understood this aspect by greatly increasing the number of fellowships for research and technical training. She selects indigenous inhabitants for training, in the Soviet Union, as foremen, shop stewards and engineers. She no longer imposes her own nationals for these purposes, unless they are indispensable, when she camouflages them to the best of her ability. She knows how susceptible her partners are and has mastered the difficult art of providing instruction without giving offence.
Europe should beware of the errors committed in the past through apparent una-wareness that " the manner of giving is more important than the gift."
It may thus be seen that the technique, or rather the art, of giving assistance is difficult and complicated. Europe is perhaps insufficiently alive to this fact. It is high time she gave thought to it and acted wittingly.
In this connexion it is worth quoting the words of an enlightened man, M. Robert Buron, former Minister for Overseas France:
" It appears only too obvious, after an analysis that is far from complete, that the mistake made by the Western nations in underdeveloped countries for several years past is twofold.
First, they tried to export, to countries not yet awakened to modern life, methods which they had not perfected at home until the final stage of their development. Failure was inevitable.
They also thought they could proceed by fits and starts and that an achievement in one field would long remain an achievement, even if nothing were done elsewhere to consolidate it. They forgot, in short, that a civilisation is an integrated whole and that it is not possible to profit from some of its material advantages if at the same time there is a refusal to participate in its intellectual, moral and psychological aspects.
To develop the under-developed countries means introducing them to modern life, whereas modern fife is itself continuously changing in Western countries. It means acquiring in a very few years, despite generally unfavourable natural and climatic conditions, what it has taken centuries to acquire in regions with a generally temperate climate and fertile soil. It means conquering nature and transforming man in the least propitious circumstances.
Admittedly, there is no more important problem than the development of such countries; but nothing is gained by hiding the fact that there is no more distressing problem either. Western man risks losing the results of long and tenacious effort by successive generations if he does not rapidly meet this new and terrifying challenge. But he should be aware from the outset that his chances of success are small. He can succeed only if he stakes all the necessary material means, makes still more determined efforts to understand the minds of those whom he would help and, lastly, if his action, instead of being dictated by self-interest, is carried on despite inevitable vicissitudes in an atmosphere of genuine sympathy and brotherhood."
At the end of this introductory report on such a vast subject, it remains for your Rapporteur to apologise for hesitating to propose, as he was originally asked to do, a draft European Charter for assistance to the less developed countries.
The first reason for my hesitation is that during the past year there was an occurrence which has already been mentioned and which must be borne in mind.
The Economic and Social Council of the United Nations has made progress in its work and has submitted to the General Assembly a draft text envisaging the creation of SUNFED. The explanatory memorandum to this draft provides in advance a " roof ", as it were, for any document affirming that assistance is a moral and social obligation.
Since the great majority of European States are Members of the United Nations, there seems to be little point in a special declaration inspired by the same principle.
Your Rapporteur has hesitated to propose a European Charter for another reason. It is difficult, without being naive or hypocritical, to mingle in one and the same document moral principles of the highest order, such as Human Rights, with considerations of defence against a fanatical and cunning adversary.
True, there is a common denominator, which is the defence of our liberties. But that defence is not viewed in the same light by those who would draft the Charter and by those for whom it would be intended. Is it not wiser to avoid inevitable misunderstandings?
Lastly, why hide the fact that public opinion is rather tired of these proclamations of intent, which have often served only to mask the ambitions and machinations of countries inspired by motives which are much less altruistic than their words? For a time words may act as a stimulant; they lose their power when they are not borne out by deeds.
Fortunately, during this same year, several events have occurred which pave the way for useful initiatives in the field of European assistance.
There is, first, the ratification of the Common Market Treaty, which will enable six-Power Europe to make a concerted effort in a number of African countries.
Secondly, there is the splendid work of the Group of Experts appointed by the Standing Committee of the Consultative Assembly. Their efforts, when the time is ripe, will enable the Strasbourg Plan to bear fruit; and they have also made useful suggestions on relations between Europe and Africa.
The time for words is past. There is no longer any need to move public opinion; the essential thing now is not to disappoint it.
What is needed is not a Charter but. a policy. This report has attempted to outline such a policy.
It is hoped that it may become a policy for Europe. Europe is, however, still slow to cast off her traditional impedimenta. She has not yet succeeded, externally, in subordinating national interests to the wider imperatives.
In the field of assistance, open to all her States, she has an opportunity for common planning and action. Here she must serve her apprenticeship as a united body, in the exercise of the most generous of callings, as well as in the concerted defence of her freedoms.
The task incumbent upon us is of the gravest urgency, but it is also a task of great worth, capable of sustaining the enthusiasm of a whole generation.
We cannot let slip so historic a chance. The Europe of tomorrow must do more than merely shed tears over her past. We who are now living must make sure that our children witness the rebirth of a Europe dedicated, as never before, to the service of mankind.
This report was first considered in detail by a Sub-committee of the Political Committee consisting of MM. Devinat (Chairman and Rapporteur), Bohy, Meyer, Montini, Ninine, Russell and Strasser. A preliminary discussion took place in the Political Committee on 13th February 1958. The Sub-committee thereafter continued its work and a joint meeting was held on 3rd March 1958 with the Sub-committee of the Economic Committee which is studying the Development of Africa. The report was further examined by the Political Committee on 31st March, 1st and 2nd April 1958. The draft Recommendation and the two draft Orders were adopted by 23 votes to 0 and no abstentions.
Ce rapport a tout d'abord été examiné par une sous-commission de la commission politique composée de MM. Devinat (Président et rapporteur), Bohy, Meyer, Montini, Ninine, Russell et Strasser. Une discussion préliminaire a eu lieu à la commission politique le 13 février 1958. La sous-commission a ensuite continué ses travaux. Elle a tenu une réunion commune, le 3 mars 1958, avec la sous-commission pour le développement de l'Afrique de la commission économique. Le rapport a été de nouveau examiné par la commission politique, les 31 mars, 1er et 2 avril 1958. Le projet de recommandation et les deux projets de directive ont été adoptés par 23 voix contre 0 et aucune abstentions.
it may only make repayable loans ;
it must satisfy itself that investments financed by these loans are capable of earning profits.
the assisted States must guarantee repayment of the loans ;
the Bank may neither invest directly on its own account nor hold shares in companies financed.
members willing to submit basic development projects;
members who consider that they have insufficient resources at the present time for such an enormous task;
members which are ready to contribute, however small the initial grants may have to be.
Asia and Far East: 31 to 33%
Latin America: 26 to 29 %
Middle East: 19 to 21 %
Africa: 8 to 10 %
Europe: 3 to 7 %
Agricultural production: 20 to 25 %
Health services: 17 to 21 %
Development planning: 14 to 15 %
Industrial production: 7 to 11 %
Food industry: 8 to 10 %
Power and transport: 7 to 8 %
Education: 7 to 8 %
Community development: 6 to 9 %
Experts: 59 to 67 %
Fellowships: 14 to 21 %
Equipment and supplies: 6 to 14 %
Electric power: 39 %
Transport and communications: 33 %
Industry: 11 %
Agriculture and forestry: 6 %
Miscellaneous: 11 %
The Colombo Plan for Co-operative Economic Development in South and South-east Asia originated when India, Pakistan, Ceylon, Burma and Indonesia beacame independent, and in the belief that the Marshall Plan technique, which was proving so successful in Europe, might be adapted to Asian needs. The Colombo Plan as such was devised at a meeting in Colombo in January 1950 between representatives of India, Pakistan and Ceylon, on the one hand, and the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, on the other. The only machinery set up, apart from the Technical Co-operation Scheme and an Information Unit, was the Consultative Committee, whose terms of reference were defined as " to survey the needs, to assess the resources available and required, to focus world attention on the development problems of the area, and to provide a framework within which an international co-operative effort could be promoted to assist the countries of the area to raise their living standards. " It was subsequently agreed that Commonwealth countries in the area should draw up development programmes for a six-year period from 1st July 1951, and four months later, India, Pakistan, Ceylon and the British Colonial Territories had drawn up their individual plans.
The report which emerged from that meeting indicated the chief features of the economic and political situation in South and South East Asia:
Against this general background detailed development programmes were presented by India, Pakistan, Ceylon and the British Colonial territories. They concentrated on basic economic development, agriculture and transport, communications and electric power accounting for 70 % of estimated programme expenditure, as compared with 10 % for industry.
The primary purpose of the programmes was to lay sound foundations for further development. Two particular limitations affecting the programmes were stressed •—• shortage of trained men and shortage of capital—. External finance needed over the six-year period was estimated at £1, 100 million, of which £250 million could be provided by running down sterling balances in London, while for the rest Government-to-Govern-ment financing was envisaged as a substantial source.
The Colombo Plan thus started as a purely Commonwealth affair, but it was contemplated from the beginning that all countries in the area should be invited to participate on equal terms. There were no formal conditions of membership, but each participating country was expected to submit its development programme for scrutiny by the others, to make an annual progress report and to participate fully in the annual meetings of the Consultative Committee. In fact, since 1954, membership has included all Asian countries eastwards of Pakistan, with the exception of China, and North Vietnam, and there has been close liaison with the I. B. R. D., E. C. A. F. E., and the Technical Assistance Board of the United Nations.
Assistance takes many forms, including outright grants for technical assistance and capital development, Govermnent-to-Government loans, and loans from public lending institutions. Over the whole period of the Colombo Plan to mid-1956, external aid from Governments amounted to about £970 million, while in the same period the International Bank lent about £130 million. By far the larger part of this has come from the United States, though the United Kingdom has provided about £84 million apart from sterling balance releases, Canada £48 million, Australia £25 million, New Zealand £5 million and India £3 million (for Nepal).
The Plan is not so much a plan, in the generally accepted sense of the word, as a series of separate plans, drawn up and administered by each country in the region, discussed and commented on by all members of the organisation, with each individual country retaining full responsibility for the formulation and execution of its own programme. There is no master-plan to which the separate parts are expected to conform. The all-embracing Consultative Committee, however, enables Ministers and officials to meet together and to hold joint discussion on the plans of Member Governments, and, secondly, its existence helps to focus "Western attention on the real economic problems of the region. At the wish largely of the Asian members of the Plan, the Plan is operated throughout on a wholly bilateral basis, with the result that, apart from the Technical Assistance Scheme and the Information Unit, the Colombo Plan and the Consultative Committee have neither budget nor official staff.
Broadly speaking, three types of assistance are available to the countries of the area. First, there is the governmental or institutional capital assistance from the United States and one or two other Governments, from the Export-Import Bank and from the I. B. R. D. This is administered in accordance with the procedures of the United States Government and of the institutions concerned. It is in no sense 'Colombo Plan' money, though it may well be that its volume has to some extent been determined by the impetus and the publicity that the Plan has given to Asian development.
Secondly, there are the sterling balances —assets which the Governments of Ceylon, India and Pakistan have acquired in London, largely as the result of services which those countries provided on credit to the Allied forces during the "War. "Within the limits of their drawings, these countries may use the money for any purpose they choose, and there is no question of consultation or agreement with the British Government. In addition, further funds can be made available through borrowing or credits.
The assistance provided by Australia, Canada and New Zealand is specifically 'Colombo Plan' money and is available only for projects agreed with the Governments of these countries. The normal procedure is for the Government of the country requiring aid to suggest to the donor Government a number of projects which it might help to finance. The donor Government, after examining the projects, makes its choice among them. In this way, both parties retain their right to make independent decisions.
The Plan recognises that the shortage of trained persons is almost as great an obstacle to rapid development as shortage of capital, and in order to meet these needs the Technical Co-operation Scheme of the Colombo Plan was set up in 1950. The membership of the scheme has at all times been virtually the same as that of the Consultative Committee, except that the United States, which operates its own technical assistance schemes throughout the area, has not been a member. The original members of the Scheme agreed to provide technical assistance to a value of about £8 million for a three-year period up to mid-1953. The Technical Co-operation Scheme is administered by the Council for Technical Cooperation, and there is a small Bureau in Colombo to carry out the day-to-day work of the organisation.
None of the funds available for technical assistance are handled by either the Council or the Bureau, and all negotiations for the provision of experts, training facilities and equipment are conducted bilaterally by the Governments concerned. Assistance under the Technical Co-operation Scheme is supplementary to what can be obtained from other sources, and over much of the field the major part is played by the United Nations Technical Assistance Administration, specialised agencies and the Economic Aid Programmes of the United States. The Technical Co-operation Scheme has since been prolonged, and additional funds have been made available to it. The main differences between the Technical Co-operation Scheme and the United Nations and specialised agencies working in this field are:
Member countries belonging to the area have also given their assistance. India earmarked £750,000 for the Technical Co-operation Scheme, Ceylon £400,000 and Pakistan £161,290. Out of these funds, Ceylon, India and Pakistan have provided valuable training facilities for other countries in the area, and the Governments of India and Ceylon have also provided a number of experts. Up to the middle of 1956, 572 experts had been provided under the scheme and facilities had been provided for 4,227 trainees. £l.l/2m. had been committed for the provision of equipment, largely for secondary schools, technical schools, polytechnics and universities.
The Plan also includes a small Information Unit working under the direction of an Information Committee at Colombo, composed of representatives of Member Governments. It collects information material from Member Governments, collates it and distributes it in a suitable form through Member Governments. It also maintains a central pool of information about the Plan.
The following differentiation must be made in American external aid (in chronological order):
Marshall Plan,
Point IV aid,
Technical Co-operation, and
Mutual Security.
Hunger,
Health,
Education,
Town planning.
Mutual defence of the free nations,
Economic development of poor countries
Emergency assistance in times of crisis.
I n Africa: Morocco, Libya, Ghana and Liberia,
I n Africa: Morocco, Libya, Ghana and Liberia,
In America: Mexico.
...This year has seen independence in Malaya, and with it virtually ends the period of direct British colonial rule in Asia. And the year has also brought independence to Ghana, the first colony in Africa to advance to full statehood.
So a chapter ends in Asia; a chapter begins in Africa. And both bear the same stamp —the substitution of partnership and interdependence, within a free association of peoples, for the earlier phase of imperial control.
...Certain points in Britain's record have impressed me mightily as I have travelled about the world.
The kind of community to which the new nations of Asia and Africa aspire can be fairly simply defined: it is one in which the poverty, the disease, the malnutrition, the ignorance and fatalism of the old ways can be mitigated. But such a society is much easier to describe than to achieve. It demands massive applications of brain-power and capital. It demands a degree of internal and external security. And it seems to me that in three essential ways British rule helped to satisfy these demands.
In the first place, it was through the imperial link that thousands of Asians and Africans made their first contact with Western education and administration.
...In the second place, it was through imperial channels that the colonial territories received the flow of capital and trained technological brains without which no effective attack could have been launched against massive health and economic problems.
...Railroads, roads, ports, cities, utilities, irrigation works, export crops — these preconditions of capital creation remain in Asia and Africa as a solid inheritance from the colonial period.
In the third place, it was through the imperial system that a pax Britannnica was largely maintained throughout a long century. Without this relative peace, large-scale economic development in Africa and Asia could not have been sustained.
...Within this unobtrusive policing system a world economy came into being.
...I hasten to add that, in pointing out some of the virtues of this departed order, I do not overlook its familiar vices. Nor am I suggesting its revival. There are many reasons why colonialism, as a phase of history, must come to an end.
For one thing, these transfers of power have been deeply rooted in a moral principle, the principle of self-government as an inalienable right. The peoples of Asia and Africa, once exposed to British education, learned, as Americans before them had learned, that there is no place for servitude in the British constitution. They derived from their British governors the principles through which British government would be superseded. In the end, independence could be celebrated by both sides as a consummation of mutual desires.
There are also, I believe, strong economic reasons for ending the direct imperial rule. To the colonial powers, empire in the twentieth century has proved to be not a boon but a burden when viewed in over-all economic perspective. With modern welfare policies and modern concepts of investment and expansion, the financing of dependent territories has become steadily more costly.
Britain, for instance, has found her capital reserves desperately depleted as a result of two world wars in which she fought from the first day to the last, and it is only through spartan self-discipline that she has fulfilled her -worldwide economic commitments. The equivalent of the whole Marshall Plan aid to Britain was passed on to India through the release of sterling balances. Colonial welfare and development funds have poured into Africa. Britain is a partner in the Colombo Plan for Asian expansion. As a banker for the whole sterling area she has, with miraculous skill, underpinned 50 per cent of the world's trade with a dollar reserve no larger than that of the Ford Foundation.
But the strain has told. The recurrent crises in sterling have been evidence of a weight of world commitment heavier than the economy can bear.
For the subject peoples, too, the time has come for transition. In the process of growth and expansion there comes a moment when only truly heroic efforts — a vast expenditure of energy in productive work, an iron self-discipline — can achieve the transformation of a static into a dynamic economy. If one requirement is, as economists tell me, the nation's ability to raise the share of annual income devoted .to capital investment from, say, 5 to around 12 per cent, then great sacrifices must be made; a leadership, a drive, an administrative energy is demanded which foreign rulers, however well-intentioned, cannot provide but which may emerge, almost miraculously, from the people themselves in that burst of national pride which comes from national freedom.
No, I make no plea for a restoration of Western empire.
But I do insist upon a recognition by all of us, and by my countrymen especially, that the end of empires does not mean automatically an end to the problems with which empires coped. The problems remain, some of them vastly increased in difficulty and danger by the withdrawal of imperial power.
The blunt truth of the matter is that things are not going so well for our side in those areas where the individualist und collectivist societies compete for the allegiance of millions who hardly know the difference between the two. In Indonesia, amid confusion, Communism is making dangerous gain. In India a crisis approaches its culmination; the second five-year plan is in peril, the unemployed and under-employed total some fifty million, and the Communists, having taken over the small but densely populated state of Kerala, agitate with increased persuasiveness. In the Middle East, Soviet Russia has achieved ambitions pursued vainly by the Tsars for centuries. In Algeria, the rising nationalism is enfeebling America's great and ancient ally, France. There is trouble in Ghana, mounting racial tension in South Africa, and a rising racial consciousness everywhere whose repression anywhere can only lead ultimately to explosions.
Wherever economic development is the best insurance against collectivism and development by force there is an acute shortage of needed capital — and everywhere in these under-developed areas the already dangerously high population pressures steadily increase.
Like Alice and the Red Queen, the new nations of Asia and Africa have to run faster and faster just to stay, where they are. Yet they find it difficult to maintain even the pace already set; they certainly cannot keep up with their advancing needs unless they receive more economic assistance from highly-developed nations. To become and remain truly independent these " have-not" nations must grow economically strong, a fact well realised by their leaders who are combing the world for credits and capital.
Private capital generally goes to the more stable and expanding industrial nations. When it goes into less developed areas it is generally in quest of quick, high profits, high enough to justify the risks, quick enough to reduce them. Thus the extractive enterprises, such as oil, are more inviting than the long-range transport and utilities projects which these areas so desperately need.
And, even if private capital were far more disposed to go into basic developments than it now is, it could hardly do so on the scale required by immediate needs. India, for example, will need credits of some 2,000 million dollars to sustain the second five-year plan, announced with such high hopes only last year. And if it isn't forthcoming? Well, Communism feeds on misery, and to the north of this great sub-continent, which has learned to hope, the Bear and Dragon are watchfully working and waiting.
But so it is everywhere. We discount at our peril the magnitude of the Communist effort to capture the un-committed countries and dramatically tip the scales of power by economic co-operation and political penetration.
Obviously, the larger loans and credits can usually be provided only by or with the aid of Governments. In this connection, two developments since Suez have disturbed me. One is the growing reluctance of the American taxpayer, after spending 50,000 million dollars abroad since the war, to continue foreign aid on a scale commensurate with the past or the needs. And, due to his poor education about foreign aid, the average American seems much more disposed to spend his tax dollars on military assistance abroad than to invest in economic development, though military strength is illusory without a strong economic foundation. Nor can I see much prospect of change in the American attitude without strong persuasive leadership in both the executive and legislative branches of Government.
The other development which disturbs me is the British White Paper of last July on " The United Kingdom's Role in Commonwealth Development" announcing a standstill policy on overseas investment and no Government loans to the newly-independent nations of the Commonwealth, just when the need is most acute.
There are other sources of economic aid in the free world — notably Western Germany. I have suggested that Germany initiate an extensive foreign economic development programme. It would not only further peace and security but would open markets which Germany and other trading nations need.
An international development fund also merits consideration. Some nations are fearful or proud about loans or grants from a single big country. Aside from the manifest advantages of pooling our reserves of money and manpower to do bigger, better jobs, such a multilateral agency in which Russia was a participant would at least limit her use of economic assistance as a uni lateral political weapon. And if the Soviet Union refused to contribute to a multilateral fund and persisted in " going it alone ", the inferences would be obvious to all.
Regardless of pooling, it seems to me that a vigorous, enlarged and co-ordinated Western effort in economic development is imperative. For greater efficiency and to accomplish the most with the funds available, our separate programmes should be co-ordinated. The Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (O. E. E. C), which includes most of the " capital-rich " countries, seems to me ready-made for that purpose and could bring in the Colombo Plan and other international agencies, for the execution of specific projects.
To conclude : Many of the present difficulties of the new nations stem from the fact that Western imperialism is over and the empires are vanishing. In their wake are inevitable power vacuums. Eventually they must be filled by the ex-colonial peoples themselves, but in the meantime these people are exposed to the contending forces of power politics while lacking the tools to raise their standards of living and establish their own security.
The Communists' economico-political penetration is succeeding, as events in the Middle East and Far East demonstrate. It is a greater danger than direct nuclear attack, in my judgement. And their effort is on an ascending scale while ours is descending. But, even if the economic- political-psychological conflict were not mounting in menace and intensity, the West would have to continue to provide what the colonial powers provided before — the external military shield and the internal economic aid which these countries reasonably need and can properly use. We are obliged to do so, I think, not only by our present and future self-interest, but also by our moral commitment to humanity.
The means open to the Territories are, as usual, of two kinds: the Administration and private enterprise.
| Millions of metric tons | 1952 | 1953 | 1954 | 1955 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agricultural products | 1,4 | 1,8 | 1,9 | 2,1 |
| Mining products | 1,3 | 2,2 | 2,1 | 3,1 |
| Dollar area | E.P.U | Other areas | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| French West Africa | + 7 | — 10 | — 0.4 | — 3.4 | 1954 | ||
| French West Africa | + 5 | — 11 | — 1 | — 7 | 1955 | ||
| French Equatorial Africa | — 7 | — 8 | — 1 | — 16 | 1954 | ||
| French Equatorial Africa | — 7 | — 5 | — | 1 | — | 13 | 1955 |
| Cameroons | + 5 | + 10 | + 0.4 | — 15.4 | 1954 | ||
| Cameroons | +5.4 | +13 | - 1.4 | - 17 | 1955 | ||
| Togoland | + 2 | — 0.2 | + 0.6 | + 2.4 | 1954 | ||
| Togoland | + 3.7 | + 1.7 | + 1 | + 6.4 | 1955 | ||
| Madagascar | + 2.9 | — 8.1 | — 0.9 | — 6.1 | 1954 | ||
| Madagascar | + 2.3 | - 10.2 | - 1.3 | - 9.2 | 1955 | ||
| St.Pierre & Miquelon | - 1.4 | - 0.4 | - | - 1.8 | 1954 | ||
| St.Pierre & Miquelon | - 12 | - 0.6 | — | — 1.8 | 1955 | ||
| New Calledonie | - 2.5 | - 6.2 | + 2 | - 6.2 | 1954 | ||
| New Calédonie | - 3.7 | - 6.4 | + 3.1 | - 7 | 1955 | ||
| Océania | - 2.6 | - 2 | + 2.2 | - 2.4 | 1954 | ||
| Océania | - 2.5 | - 1.2 | + 2.7 | - 2 |
The provisions relating to the association of overseas territories with the Common Market are contained in:
It shall be the aim of the Community, by establishing a Common Market and progressively approximating the economic policies of Member States, to promote throughout the Community a harmonious development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion, an increased stability, an accelerated raising of the standard of living and closer relations between its Member States (Art. 2).
For the purposes set out in the preceding Article, the activities of the Community shall include, under the conditions and with the timing provided for in the Treaty, the association of overseas countries and territories with the Community with a view to increasing trade and to pursuing jointly their effort towards economic and social development (Art. 3, para. k).
The purpose of this association shall be to promote the economic and social development of the countries and territories and to establish close economic relations between them and the Community as a whole.
In conformity with the principles stated in the Preamble to this Treaty, this association shall in the first place permit the furthering of the interests and prosperity of the inhabitants of these countries and territories in such a manner as to lead them to the economic, social and cultural development which they expect (Art. 131).
A list of the overseas countries and territories to which the special provisions on association contained in Part Four of the Treaty apply will be found at Annex IV to the TreatyNote
Observations
the free movement of goods;
agriculture, with the exception of Art. 40, para. 4;
the liberalisation of services;
the rules of competition;
the measures of safeguard provided for in Articles 108, 109 and 226; and
the institutions, shall apply as from the date of the entry into force of the Treaty (Art. 227, para. 2);
In a Declaration of Intention contained in the Final Act, the six signatory Governments of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community declared their readiness, upon the entry into force of the Treaty, to propose to the independent countries of the franc area the opening of negotiations with a view to concluding conventions for economic association with the Community.
In another Declaration of Intention, the six Governments declared their readiness, upon the entry into force of the Treaty, to propose to the Kingdom of Libya the opening of negotiations with a view to concluding conventions for economic association with the Community. An identical provision was made with regard to Somaliland after the ending of the Italian trustee administration on 2nd December 1960.
Member States shall contribute to the investments required by the progressive development of the overseas countries and territories (Art. 132, para. 3).
In relations between Member States and the overseas countries and territories, the right of establishment of nations and countries shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions, and by application of the procedures, referred to in the Chapter of the Treaty relating to the right of establishment (Arts. 52-58) and on a non-discriminatory basis, subject to the transitional conditions (Art. 132, para. 5).
Imports originating in the overseas countries and territories shall, on their entry into Member States, benefit by the total abolition of customs duties which shall take place progressively between Member States in conformity with the provisions contained in Articles 12-17 of the Treaty (Art. 133, para. 1).
Customs duties imposed on imports from Member States and from overseas countries and territories shall, on the entry of such imports into any of the other overseas countries or territories, be progressively abolished in conformity with the provisions of the Treaty relating to relations between Member States (Art. 133, para. 2).
The overseas countries and territories may, however, levy customs duties which correspond to the needs of their development and to the requirements of their industrialisation or which, being of a fiscal nature, have the object of contributing to their budgets.
Such duties shall be progressively reduced to the level of those imposed on imports of products coming from the Member State with which the overseas country or territory has special relations (Art. 133, para. 3).
The freedom of movement in Member States of workers from the overseas countries and territories, and in the overseas countries and territories of workers from Member States, shall be governed by subsequent conventions which shall require unanimous agreement (Art. 135).
An Implementing Convention appended to the Treaty determines the particulars and procedure concerning the association of the overseas countries and territories with the Community for a first period of five years.
Before the expiry of the Convention, the Council, acting by means of a unanimous vote, shall determine the provisions to be made for a further period (Art. 136).
(a) The Member States shall, by means of efforts complementary to those made by the responsible authorities of the overseas countries and territories, participate in any measure suitable for the promotion of the essential and economic development of those countries and territories.
For this purpose a Development Fund for the overseas countries and territories shall be set up, into which the Member States shall, during a period of five years, pay the annual contributions referred to in Annex A below.
The Fund shall be administered by the Commission (Art. 1 of the Convention).
(b) Any social or economic projects for which the assistance of the Development Fund is requested are to be submitted by the responsible authorities of the overseas countries and territories in agreement with the local authorities or with the representatives of the populations of the territories concerned (Article 2 of the Convention).
(c) The funds available are to be allocated to the different overseas countries and territories in the ratio given in Annex B below.
(d) The Commission shall communicate to the Council its proposals for the distribution of the Funds available. If, within a period of one month, no Member State requests that such proposals be considered by the Council, they shall be regarded as approved. If such proposals are considered by the Council, the latter shall act by means of a qualified majority vote (Art. 5 of the •Convention).
The qualified majority shall be 67 votes, the Member States having the following number of votes respectively:
Belgium - 11 votes
Germany - 33 —
France - 33 —
Italy - 11 —
Luxembourg - 11 —
Netherlands - 11 votes (Article 7 of the convention).
The right of establishment shall be extended progressively to nationals and companies of Member States in accordance with particulars to be determined by the Council on a proposal of the Commission (Article 8 of the Convention).
The customs system to be applied shall be that determined by Articles 133 and 134 of the Treaty (Article 9 of the Convention).
Member States shall apply to their commercial exchanges with the overseas countries and territories such provisions of the Chapter of the Treaty (Articles 30-37) relating to the elimination of quantitative restrictions between Member States as they apply in their mutual relations during the same period (Articles 10 of the Convention).
In each of the overseas territories, the import quotas open to Member States other than that State with which such territory has special relations shall be converted into global quotas open wihout discrimination to the other Member States. These quotas shall be increased annually in conformity with the general provisions (Articles 32 and 33) of the Treaty (Article 11 of the Convention).
Conversely, for each Member State, quotas in respect of imports from the overseas territories shall be fixed globally and increased in accordance with the general rules laid down in the Treaty (Article 12 of the Convention).
Imports, coming from third countries, of unroasted coffee into Italy and the Benelux countries, on the one hand, and of bananas into the Federal Republic of Germany, on the other hand, shall benefit from special tariff quotas (see Article 15 of the Convention and the annexed Protocols).
| Percentages | 1st year 10 % | 2nd year 12.5 % | 3rd year 16.5 % | 4th year 22.5 % | 5th year 38.5 % | Total 100% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Countries | (IN MILLIONS OF E. P. U. UNITS OF ACCOUNT) | |||||
| Belgium | 7 | 8.75 | 11.55 | 15.75 | 26.95 | 70 |
| Germany | 20 | 25 | 33 | 45 | 77 | 200 |
| France | 20 | 25 | 33 | 45 | 77 | 200 |
| Italy | 4 | 5 | 6.60 | 9 | 15.40 | 40 |
| Luxembourg | 0.125 | 0.15625 | 0.20625 | 0.28125 | 0.48125 | 1.25 |
| Netherlands | 7 8. | 75 | 11.55 | 15.75 | 26.95 | 70 |
| Percentages | lre année 10 % | 2e année 12.5 % | 3° année 16.5 % | 4e année 22.5 % | 5° année 38.5 % | Total 100 % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overseas Pays countries and territories of : | (IN MILLIONS OF E. P. U. UNITS OF ACCOUNT) | |||||
| Belgium | 3 | 3.75 | 4.95 | 6.75 | 11.55 | 30 |
| France | 51.125 | 63.906 | 84.356 | 115.031 | 196.832 | 511.25 |
| Italy | 0.5 | 0.625 | 0.825 | 1.125 | 1.925 5 | |
| Netherlands | 3.5 | 4.375 | 5.775 | 7.875 | 13.475 | 35 |
From the end of 1946 to May 1947, these Governments had borrowed £262.7 million on the London market (£134 million raised since the end of 1952 — £74 million for colonial territories, and £60 million for independent Commonwealth countries).
Since 1952 consents for private borrowing on the London market have been at a rate of £35-40 million a year.
Set up in 1953 as a new channel for the investment of private capital in Commonwealth schemes, its authorised capital is £15 million. Its commitments in March 1957 totalled approximately £14.5 million in twelve projects in eight Commonwealth countries.
In Commonwealth countries without highly developed capital markets, such corporations can play a valuable part in attracting non-sterling capital for new industries on a partnership basis. Many such corporations have been set up since the war.
There is a substantial flow of private investment financed from the existing resources of United Kingdom firms and by ploughing back of profits of United Kingdom companies operating in the Commonwealth. Though exceedingly difficult to estimate, it represents a major element in United Kingdom investment in the sterling Commonwealth. Substantial assistance will be given to overseas trade corporations through the finance bill of 1957 enabling them to increase the amount available for reinvestment overseas.
The total investment of private funds in the sterling Commonwealth cannot be measured exactly, but it is estimated that since 1952 the net private long-term capital outflow from the United Kingdom has averaged well over £100 million a year.
These funds are directed mainly to the colonial territories in fulfilment of the United Kingdom's special responsibilities towards them. They take the following forms.
Expenditure on approved schemes, in the form of both grants and loans, rose from £14.1 million for 1953/1954 to an estimated £18.8 million for 1956/1957. Schemes have covered agricultural development, fisheries, forestry, improvement of communications, public health, education, housing and water supplies.
This Corporation has power to undertake in colonial territories, alone or in association with private enterprise or colonial Governments, projects permitting the expansion of agriculture and industry. It operates on commercial lines and has a statutory obligation to pay its way. Up to 31st May 1957 exchequer advances outstanding to the Corporation were £54 million and at the end of 1956 the Corporation had 66 continuing projects in power, agriculture, housing, minerals and factories. The Corporation, through providing a supplementary source of capital to ordinary private enterprise, has been able to start, for the benefit of private enterprise, undertakings which would not otherwise have come into being.
In addition to providing guarantees to United Kingdom exporters, it has been possible to grant credits through the Department to other Governments in special circumstances, e.g. a £10 million credit to Pakistan in 1954 to finance the purchase of United Kingdom agricultural equipment, and authorisation for a £15 million credit in 1956 to India for equipment for a steel plant.
The United Kingdom Government announced in February 1953 that it aimed to make up to £60 million available over six years for lending by the International Bank to sterling Commonwealth countries. Disbursement of about £45 million under this scheme has so far been approved.
The total actual expenditure of public funds through the above channels has risen from £26.7 million in 1955 to an estimated £36 million in 1956/1957 (these figures do not include about £25 million annually provided during the last four years by the United Kingdom in the form of grants and loans to colonial territories which are not viable economically or are facing some serious threat to law and order or the consequences of a natural disaster).
Ordinary trading connections supply the bulk of United Kingdom experts to Commonwealth countries in the normal course of commerce, and the United Kingdom is a natural source for the recruitment of experts by private enterprise and by Government employers overseas. 4,234 Commonwealth students are taking courses at United Kingdom universities and something like 2,000 are at technical institutes, etc.
Under this scheme help is given by the United Kingdom bilaterally to India, Pakistan and Ceylon, and to foreign countries in the Colombo Plan area. Apart from nearly £2 million spent by the United Kingdom under the scheme from 1951-1956, £7 million is to be made available during the seven years beginning April 1956.
The provision of such assistance is part of the general functions of the Colonial Office. Such assistance includes the recuitment of permanent staff of all kinds for the various branches of H. M. Overseas Civil Service and of special staff on contract. The Colonial Office also provides a large number of professional advisers for such subjects as tropical agriculture, education, health, labour, social welfare, co-operative societies and engineering. The Colonial Office also has a large number of advisory bodies such as the Inter-university Council for Higher Education overseas, the Council for Overseas Colleges of Arts, Sciences and Technology, the Directorate of Overseas Geological Surveys, the Directorate of Overseas (geodetic and topographic) Surveys, the Colonial Products Laboratory, the Colonial Agricultural Research Committee and the Colonial Medical Research Committee. The Colonial Office also places students in universities, technical colleges, etc., in the United Kingdom and an ever-increasing number of places for colonial students has been made available. The number doubled between 1952 and 1956 and is now about 12,000.
| UNITED KINGDOM GOVERNMENT ECONOMIC AID TO UNDER-DEVELOPED COUNTRIESNote(£ million) | 1954-5 | 1955-6 | 1956-7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COLONIAL TERRITORIES | (a) Loans: | Colonial Services Vote | 17.4 | 3.4 | 1.1 | Colonial Development and Welfare | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | Colonial Development Corporation | 4.4 | 8.1 | 6.2 | Total | 22.1 | 11.8 | 7.6 | (¿0 Grants: | Colonial Services Vote | 19.0 | 17.2 | 17.1 | Colonial Development and Welfare. | 15.8 | 15.7 | 16.9 | Overseas Food Corporation | 0.1 | Total | 34.9 | 32.9 | 34 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| OTHER COMMONWEALTH TERRITORIES | (a) Loans: | Through release of sterling subscription to I.B.R.D. foot note | 3.4 | 3.7 | 4.3 | E.C.G.D. foot note Section 3 Credits | 2.5 | 1.7 | 1.3 | Total Loans | 5.9 | 5.4 | 5.6 | (b) Grants: | Colombo Plan (to Commonwealth Countries) | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.6 | Overseas Settlement | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | Commonwealth Services (e. g., subscriptions to Economic and Research Services) | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | Colonial Development and Welfare (Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland) | 0.8 | 1.6 | Total Grants | 1.2 | 2.1 | 3.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| OTHER COUNTRIES | (a) Loans: | Jordan | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.2 | Through release of sterling subscription to I.B.R.D.: | Ethiopia | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | Uruguay | 0.1 | Yugoslavia | 0.8 | 0.1 | Iceland | 0.1 | Other | 0.1 | E.C.G.D. Section 3 Credit to Persia | 0.3 | 3.6 | Argentine credit | 19.0 | Total Loans | 2.7 | 21.2 | 5.0 | (b) Grants: | Jordan | 0.2 | 0.2 | Libya | 3.9 | 3.9 | 4.1 | Yugoslavia | 1.2 | 2.6 | 1.3 | Reconstruction in Korea | 3.1 | 0.5 | Relief of Palestine refugees | 1.2 | 2.6 | 1.9 | Other overseas relief | 0.1 | 0.2 | Colombo Plan (non-Commonwealth) | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | U.N. Technical Assistance | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.6 | U.N. Specialised Agencies | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3 | Total Grants | 11.9 | 12.1 | 9.6 | TOTAL LOANS | 30.7 | 38.4 | 18.2 | TOTAL GRANTS | 48.0 | 47.1 | 46.7 | TOTAL | 78.7 | 85.5 | 64.9 |
From 1955 to 1957 Egypt received two thousand million Swisss francs worth of aid from the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia. Yugoslavia has received aid amounting to 1,900 m. Swiss francs, Syria 1,180 m., India 1,140 m., Afghanistan 613 m., Indonesia 460 m. and other countries 578 m. These amounts add up to a total of 7,900 m. Swiss francs.
The strength of the Soviet bloc's position in this matter is based on the work of the Common Economic Council which comprises all these countries. This organisation is directed from and by Moscow, and works in close touch with those responsible for the export and import policy of the member countries, which makes it possible to have an efficient common policy in relation to neutral countries, aid being granted in the form of extensive credits and other facilities. To quote an example, the Eastern zone of Germany is particularly well placed as regards electrical equipment, Poland, as regards mining equipment, etc.
Out of this total of nearly 8 milliard Swiss francs, about 1,700 m. were given as military aid and more than 3,500 m. are for the development of industrial plants. It is likely that out of this sum about 1,000 m. Swiss francs have already been paid out.
Compared with United States economic and military aid which has amounted, since 1945, to about 210,000 m. Swiss francs, of which 5,000 m. went to under-developed countries, the aid given by the Soviet Union may be considered as small, especially if one takes into consideration the sums which have in fact been paid out. But it must be realised that the conditions accepted by the Soviet Union are extremely advantageous for the assisted countries. While the United States normally lends at 4 % interest, and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development at 5.3/4 % or 6 %, Soviet loans only carry an interest of 2 %. It should be added that these loans are usually long-term, reimbursement being often spread over thirty years and never less than twelve years. Another advantage is that reimbursements can usually be made in kind. It is important to note, however, that Soviet loans can only be used in the Soviet Union and in other countries of the Soviet bloc, and, furthermore, that they are only granted for purchases of industrial equipment.
Finally, the Soviet Union and other countries of the Soviet bloc furnish, under condi-tions which are specified in contracts, a wide range of technical and scientific assistance. It is estimated that at the present time China is receiving the help of 2,000 technicians who come for a period of more than six months.
Trade between countries of the Soviet bloc and some of the assisted countries has increased remarkably during the last three years. This is so, for example, in the case of Egypt and Syria. Nor is it a negligible advantage for the Russians that they are willing to conclude barter agreements at a time when producers of raw materials are meeting with difficulties in view of the fall in prices on the world markets. Sudan has been able to sell important quantities of cotton through barter agreements to Burma, Iceland and the Lebanon.
The possibilities of the Soviet Union and other countries of the Soviet bloc for early delivery are better than had been thought, at least as regards the requirements of under-developed areas with whom, moreover, the notable increase in the imports of the U. S. S. R., notably food, facilitates the conclusion of commercial agreements. There is no doubt, Finanz und Wirlschafl concludes, that the Soviet bloc is increasingly in a position to deliver numerous kinds of goods and is becoming a more and more serious rival on the international markets. This is an important event which must be taken note of, especially as regards the under-developed countries, where Russia does not hesitate to send strong teams of technicians.