394 



Table 1. — Mekong project: Operational resources of Jan. 11, 1965 — Continued 



[Total resources contributed or pledged to the Mekong scheme in approximate 

 U.S. dollar equivalent as of Jan. 11, 1965] — Continued 



Investment contributions — Continued 



Israel grant for Nam Ngum Tributary Project in Laos 50, 000 



Subtotal; investment for construction 40,632,779 



Total ; preinvestment and investment 67, 776, 593 



1 Through its Colombo plan progra total participation to date of 8 countries In Colombo 

 plan equals approximately $12,294,803. 



2 Includes fellowships the cost of which in most cases are not included in the cost figure 

 given above. 



8 Joint contribution by Nordic group ; Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. 



* In 1961 the United States undertook to investigate the feasibility of the Pa Mong 

 project subject to the constitutional process of appropriation in the United States, and 

 equally on the understanding that, as in all comprehensive feasibility investigations, a 

 demonstration of nonfeasibility would terminate the investigations ; the broad estimate in 

 1961 of the total sum involved was $2,500,000 ; a subsequent estimate bv the U.S. Bureau 

 of Reclamation was $5,000,000 ; the detailed firm estimate of U.S. expenditure for the first 

 phase of the work, now in process, is $690,000. 



8 ECAFE also performs many of the functions of the United Nations as executing agency 

 for the United Nations Special Fund tributary hydrography and mineral surveys and In- 

 stitutional support projects listed above. 



8 Total World Food Program pledge for both planning and construction: $1,315,840 

 equivalent. 



7 No cost estimate given. 



Note. — In addition to the 4 firms listed in the above table, principal engineering firms 

 engaged in the various programs include : Associated Consulting Engineers of Karachi ; 

 Certeza Surveying Co. ; Christian! & Nielson (Thai) Ltd. ; Japan Electric Power Develop- 

 ment Co. ; Harza Co. International ; Hunting Survey Corp. Ltd. ; Italconsult ; Nippon Koei 

 Co. Ltd. ; Rogers International ; Soclete Grenobloise d'Etudes et d'Appliactions Hydrau- 

 liques (SOGREAH) ; Societe Francalse d'Etudes et de Realisation d'Equipements Elec- 

 triques (SOFRELEF) ; Salgltter Industries Gesellschaft MPH ; and Philipp Holzman AG/ 

 Siemens Bauunlon GmbH. 



Perhaps the most notable events to be chronicled about the Mekong 

 Scheme from its inception to early 1965, a period of more than a 

 decade, were the events that did not happen. The rather imnrovised 

 Coordination Committee was able to maintain coherence and control, 

 as well as forward movement, The four Riparian States, despite sev- 

 eral serious diplomatic contretemps, continued their active participa- 

 tion and cooperation in the Committee. Communist factions in all four 

 States did not impede the field studies or construction, and a mini- 

 mum of guerrilla incidents were reported, even as the conflict in Viet- 

 nam worsened. Among donor nations also, competition for choice ac- 

 tivities or preferential arrangements does not appear to have surfaced. 

 A feature publication issued by the United Nations Office of Public 

 Information in March 1965 called attention to this uncommon amity : 



The Mekong project ... is for the good of all the people of the Lower 

 Mekong Basin, without distinction as to nationality, race, or political creed. Be- 

 cause of this, the Mekong Committee has been able to convene its meetings with- 

 out interruption in all the four riparian countries in spite of the difficulties be- 

 setting their relations. It met in Laos when that country was under siege. In 

 October 1961, when Cambodia broke relations with Thailand, the late Prime 

 Minister of Thailand, Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, expressly made an excep- 

 tion of the Mekong programme when he severed relations with Cambodin. 



A similar note was struck by Prince Souvanna Phouma. He was asked in 

 Paris a few summers iigo about the chances of a neutral Laos to feed its people. 

 The Prince, who was a private citizen at the time, replied that the hope of 

 Laos was the Mekong project. Laos, he said, was poor, but in the Mekong it 

 had a tremendous resource which, he added, was being developed under the 

 auspices of the Nations, with the help of many countries, in a completely non- 

 politlcal manner.' 12 



■h Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, "Putting the Mekong to Work — An 

 International Undertaking. Power, Irrigation and Navigation Projects Progressine : Fishery, 

 Forestry and Mineral Studies Under Wav ; Experimental Farms Set Up" (New York: 

 United Nations, March 1965), p. 10, 



