Under Secretary’s Meetings, Lot 53 D 2501

Notes of the Under Secretary’s Meeting, Department of State, 10:15 a.m., October 29, 19512

UM N–413

[Here follows a list of those present (20).]

Point IV Program

1. In introducing the subject of the proposed reorganization of TCA, Mr. Webb explained that Mr. Heneman3 and his Management Staff are now assisting the Under Secretary as a specialized group of [Page 1067] people who can make a study of a job to be done and come up with sound organizational and administrative proposals. In effect, A/MS is serving as a group of industrial engineers would in a large corporation. The proposed reorganization of TCA4 is a pilot model of that type of study which could take place in other areas of the Department.

2. Mr. Heneman reviewed the proposed reorganization of TCA and referrred to an organization chart at hand to indicate the specific changes to be made. He pointed out that it was not until recent Congressional action had taken place that it could be decided how TCA should be organized and what job it had to do. One of the primary problems is to determine how to set up TCA, as well as the regional bureaus, to handle Point IV matters. TCA is to be set up as a focal point in the Department on Point IV matters, and within this organisation there are specific points of contact for the regional bureaus and the other agencies on their problems at hand. Originally, TCA was set up on a functional basis, but now the emphasis has changed to a geographic organization with certain technical and general staff functions, Mr. Heneman explained that there are two development services—one for Latin America and one for the Near East, with the possible establishment of one at a later time for Asia and Africa. One problem which A/MS faced in making their current study was the integration of the IIAA into the TCA operation. He pointed out that there would be duplication of staff and facilities, if IIAA were allowed to continue as is. Mr. Heneman pointed out that an effort had been made to keep the Washington organization as small as possible and only develop staff by responding to the needs from the field. With the Institute becoming a part of TCA, then the personnel and know-how already developed by the Institute could be utilized on a global basis. In other words, some of the people in the Institute would be utilized to assist in other areas.

3. Mr. Heneman pointed out that the Country Directors which would be set up in the field would be under the Ambassador. He also stated that the appointment of key people going to the field would be discussed with the responsible regional bureau. He stated that if TCA expands its procurement and supply functions, it would be necessary to set up an assistant administrator for this particular task, but at the present time the job does not warrant this position.

4. Mr. Heneman explained that this plan had been developed in consultation with the staffs of the regional bureaus, and it is hoped that the working relationships with the bureaus would be improved by this arrangement.

[Here follows discussion of the basis of the Point IV program for underdeveloped areas.]

[Page 1068]

8. With respect to the IIAA, Mr. McGhee,5 because of his past experience with that organization, pointed out how effective it is in the field. He felt that its power and authority should not be diluted merely to achieve administrative consistency. Mr. Heneman assured Mr. McGhee that the IIAA as an organization was not being abolished but would be better utilized under the TCA reorganization.

9. Mr. Miller agreed with Mr. McGhee’s comments on the Institute. He pointed out that he had not heard of the proposal discussed by Mr. Heneman and took exception to it. He stated that the creation of TCA did not facilitate the work of the IIAA, and he is very apprehensive of the proposal made by Mr. Heneman. With respect to the Country Director proposal, Mr. Miller reserved his position on this. He felt that in some cases a Country Director should report to the Counselor for Economic Affairs. The pattern for the Country Directors should not be the same for every country.

10. Dr. Bennett referred to his great respect for the IIAA and indicated his efforts to give the Institute freedom and to step up its program. He explained that the proposal was not to abolish the IIAA but was to reduce the Washington overhead by not duplicating staff. Thus, the top-flight people in IIAA could be utilized to help in other areas. Mr. Heneman emphasized that if the staff in IIAA is left intact, it would duplicate staff required in other areas. The value of the IIAA is recognized and the proposal made in the reorganization was not made merely for the sake of organizational neatness. Dr. Bennett assured Mr. Miller that the Institute would not suffer tinder his direction. Mr. Humelsine6 suggested that all of the “development services” be called “institutes”. Mr. McGhee agreed that this would be a good idea, and Mr. Miller added that the name of the IIAA is invaluable in Latin America. Mr. Heneman agreed that the “development services” could be called anything desired. Mr. Webb pointed out that the “development services” are not “institutes”. He pointed out that we cannot maintain separate corporations such as the IIAA, because the tendency in government, in both the Executive and legislative branches, is against this type of organization. Mr. McGhee agreed that it need not be a corporation but pointed out that an “institute” could serve as a focal point within the government for providing this type of aid to a certain area. In addition, he stated that it would be much easier to get a better man to become “president” of an “institute” than merely a “director” or “chief” of a “development service”. Mr. Webb pointed out that the decision on this question of the “institute” was not final.

[Here follows discussion of the need for a regional administrator of the Point IV program in the Middle East area.]

  1. Master file of records of meetings, documents, summaries, and agenda of the Under Secretary’s Meetings for the years 1949–1952, as maintained and retired by the Executive Secretariat of the Department of State.
  2. The Under Secretary’s Meeting convened weekly; it was customarily attended by the Deputy Under Secretaries of State, Assistant Secretaries of State, and certain office directors. Under Secretary of State Webb presided at these meetings.
  3. Harlow J. Heneman, Director, Management Staff, Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of State for Administration.
  4. For documentation on this subject, see vol. i, pp. 1641 ff.
  5. George C. McGhee, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern, South Asian, and African Affairs.
  6. Carlisle H. Humelsine, Deputy Under Secretary of for Administration.