Sen. Jacob Javits (R.NY) said today he was one of a group of Senators who had opposed the move. “I think we have given… those who are the enemies of freedom a much greater opportunity,” he said.
Blanchard told the press conference today that “I think it is very proper that the ILO deal with political problems only to the extent that those problems have to do with the specific task of the ILO, which is the improvement of the conditions of workers.” Meanwhile, he said, he was working on a contingency plan to take into account the U.S. pullout, effective Saturday, which will mean an end to the $20 million annual U.S. contribution to ILO, one-fourth of the organization’s budge.
UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim expressed “deep regret and concern” over the American move. He criticized it as a “retrogressive step for the principle of collective responsibility and from the goal of universality in United Nations bodies.”
William vanden Heuvel, the U.S. Ambassador to the European office of the UN, told the ILO in announcing the withdrawal in Geneva last night, that “the present disagreements are not beyond reconciliation.” He said the U.S. will “strive to communicate our concern and listen to proposed solutions so that all of us can look forward to a stronger rededicated, more purposeful ILO in which the United States will be appropriately a member.”
ISRAEL AMBIVALENT OVER U.S. WITHDRAWAL
(In Jerusalem, officials seemed confused today over the U.S. withdrawal from the ILO and it appeared unlikely that Israel would do the same. A Foreign Ministry statement described the American pull-out as “significant” because it meant that the largest employer and “the largest workers unions” were leaving an international agency concerned with labor matters. The statement noted, however, that Israel has a different set of considerations with respect to the ILO.
(Even though Israel is still bitter over the ILO’s 1975 decision to grant the PLO official observer status, Israel hesitates to withdraw itself. One source here said that to do so would achieve the main purpose of Israel’s enemies in the ILO. More-over, Israel needs every possible international platform to explain its positions, the source said. Another consideration noted was that while the U.S. may withdraw now but re-enter with ease in the future, if Israel pulled out it might find itself permanently barred from the organization.)
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
