Office of the Historian

782.5 MAP/5–1551: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Turkey 1

secret
priority
Washington, May 18, 1951—7 p. m.

615. Toisa. For Amb, Dorr and Arnold from State, ECA and Defense. Re Embtel 733 May 15.2

1. In view fol factors, and particularly on assumption full and immed implementation by Turks of supplementary mil programs wld [Page 1165] not be jeopardized thereby (see para 1b) we feel suggestion contained Ecato 324 Para 2 has merit.3

(a)
Ecato 241, Apr 12,4 Para 5, stated that under ISAC agreement priority must be given programs in Ecato 241 Para 3a and b in allotting $27.4 million from 1951 funds. In our view this does not mean that entire $27.4 million must be devoted to mil support programs, which wld leave no additional FY 51 funds for investment program. A lesser amt can be allocated from FY 51 funds, with the balance to be met from FY 52 funds if such lesser amt will assure full and immed implementation of supplemental mil programs mentioned Ecato 241 Para 3a and b.
(b)
We note from Embtel 634 Apr 105 Para 5 that TGS promised Gen Arnold that supplementary mil programs wld be undertaken as soon as Turks notified of US agreement to provide eventual financing.
(c)
We note that both Ankara and Washington are in agreement (subj to qualification in Para 8) that $58 and 82 million are to be applied to mil support and investment programs respectively from planned $140 million available for US FY 51 to FY 52. The only question is how much of the mil support program must be met from FY 51 funds (balance having first priority on FY 52 funds) to assure full and immed implementation these supplementary mil programs.
(d)
We are impressed with arguments advanced by Amb in Embtel 663, Apr 19,6 and by Dorr in Toeca 345 Apr 225 that serious public relations problem may result if entire amt unallocated FY 51 aid is devoted to mil support programs at apparent expense minimum anticipated aid for investment program for balance FY 51.
(e)
From viewpoint declining ECA Turk investment program as well as Cong reaction, we wld favor larger investment imports from FY 51 funds than from FY 52 funds.

2. We recognize and appreciate careful consideration reflected in Embtel 733. Suggestion contained Ecato 324 designed not only to further total Turk mil and econ contribution all within priority requirements of ISAC discussions but to permit phasing of both mil and econ programs for FY 51 and 52. However, if after consideration this telegram Amb in consultation with ECA and JAMMAT continues consider recommendations Embtel 733 shld not be changed you may consider that recommendations Embtel 733 have our approval, as we feel final decision this particular case shld rest with you. Request ur decision be implemented immed by submission 202’s.

3. If additional $13.6 million used for investment program FY 51, mil program wld absorb $17.8. Now understand that wld leave for US FY 52 (a) balance Turk FY 51 mil program of $13.6, (b) about $26.7 for Turk FY 52 mil support programs, and (c) $40.3 for investment program. We note Turk FY 51 supplemental mil [Page 1166] programs now $31.4 and not $34.1. We presume programs pared per Embtel 662 Apr 19.

4. In principle, for US internal planning purposes, concur in formula outlined Para 5, 6, 7 Embtel 733 for support Turk FY 52 supplementary mil programs. However, no commitment can or shld be made to Turks at this time and we expect them make real effort to increase support their mil programs next year.

5. Recent BOB discussions indicated extreme skepticism need for commitment even final $27.4 million FY 51 funds (now assured) for Turkey. This plus increased tightness ECA funds make it doubtful whether it is now possible to allot $5 million from FY 51 funds as outlined Para 5 Ecato 241. Request wld require strongest polit mil justification. Wld have to be fully paid by 30 June 51.

Acheson
  1. Drafted by Moore, GTI, and Gulick, EPD/ECA; cleared with Warren A. Silver, S/ISA, Blaisdell, EPD/ECA, and Major Waddell, Office of the Secretary of Defense; and approved by William M. Rountree, GTI.↩
  2. Ante, p. 1162.↩
  3. Not printed, but see footnote 3, p. 1163.↩
  4. Ante, p. 1140.↩
  5. Not printed.↩
  6. Ante, p. 1143.↩
  7. Not printed.↩