Memorandum by the Representative of the Department of Defense on the Executive Group on Foreign Aid (Lincoln) to the Under Secretary of State (Webb)


Here are the “Essential Points of Mutual Security Program”, which I promised I would attempt to draft.

You suggested that some outline such as the attached might be the basis for discussion with Mr. Richards1 this afternoon with the thought that we might want to learn more about the best method of approach to Senator George2 and other members of Congress.


Paper Prepared by the Representative of the Department of Defense on the Executive Group on Foreign Aid (Lincoln)


Essential Points of Mutual Security Program

The Program relates and integrates practically all economic aid and military aid on a world-wide basis to attain the maximum security return for taxpayer’s dollar. It is part of the U.S. preparedness program.
It is founded on experience, organization and authorizing legislation of ECA, MDAP and Act for International Development. It is to be stressed that ECA, with European recovery practically achieved a year ahead of schedule, is now to be directed in major part to economic support of increased military strength.
The program has been worked up in the form of four titles, each dealing with a geographic area—Europe, Middle East and Africa, Asia, and Latin America. There is a fifth title of general provisions, including U.N. contributions.
As reported to BOB, approximately three-quarters is arms aid; most of the remainder is ECA aid designed to make possible increased military effort and military production. A comparatively small proportion is Point IV type aid designed to help people to help themselves—thereby reducing political and social unrest while generating increased production.
The Point IV funds are primarily to provide skilled advice and some demonstration equipment to help backward countries now trying to increase their productivity.
The great part of the funds for Asia are for support, either direct or indirect of forces opposing Communism—Thailand, Indo-China, Philippines, and principally Formosa. These countries do not have the industry to produce or money to buy the arms. Communist revolt and/or a heavy arms load creates a need for some economic aid.
The funds for Europe, including Greece and Turkey, are almost entirely for increased military strength to oppose Communism.
Funds for North Atlantic Treaty countries are programmed to be consistent with plans to support General Eisenhower’s mission. These countries have the manpower; they can support the forces once raised. They can’t produce the initial equipment unaided.
Some problems of the bill:
Tie-in between military plans, arms aid and economic aid;
How best to energize European military production;
Prior legislative history places Greek-Turkish economic aid in Title I and arms aid in Title II;
Tie-in between arms aid program, the military budget, and U.S. production programs;
Point IV in State or ECA
Coordination of program in Washington to assure that military, economic and political factors are tied together;
Note that the allocation responsibility given Secretary of State in 5 April letter is really limited to 5 per cent of funds in Title I—as bill is now drafted. This responsibility is really exercised in ISAC.
Handling of Germany, Spain and Yugoslavia.

  1. Representative James P. Richards of South Carolina became Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on May 15, succeeding John Kee of West Virginia who died on May 8.
  2. Senator Walter F. George of Georgia, Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.