796.001/11–2951
The Chargé in the Philippines (Harrington) to the Director of the Office of Philippine and Southeast Asian Affairs (Lacy)
official
informal
Dear Bill: I enclose copies of a recent report and recommendations on land tenancy problem in the Philippines, a copy of a letter which Dr. Renne, Chief of the ECA Mission, plans to send to President Quirino, and a copy of a letter concerning this report from the Agricultural Attaché here to Ambassador Cowen.1
I have read the enclosures carefully and although I do not presume to assess the technical validity of the ECA proposal, I feel most strongly that the Department and the Embassy should, for political reasons, give full support to plans which offer a solution to the tenancy problem which lies at the base of the dissidents in Central Luzon.
The recent election and the suspension of Governor Lacson of Negros by President Quirino demonstrate that tremendous strides are being made toward achieving political democracy in the Philippines. As you know, the Huk situation has improved measurably over the last year. The next step beyond political democracy and one which would strike at the roots of discontent which drive Filipinos into the Huk movement is an attack on the land tenancy problem. Without exception, those who have any understanding of the Philippine problem agree that the Huks cannot be completely eliminated through military force and that action must be taken to eliminate, as far as is possible, the conditions which permit recruitment by the Huks.
President Quirino has told me personally and has stated publicly, since the election, that he will devote his remaining two years in office to economic development and agricultural reform with emphasis on the problems of tenancy and land distribution. In private conversations, members of my staff have been told by Nacionalista senators [Page 1588] that a program of land reform would probably receive support from a considerable number of senate members at this time. I am convinced that there could be no more propitious moment to obtain passage of the necessary legislation for genuine land reform than now. Both major political parties are fully cognizant of the necessity of gaining public confidence. As is pointed out in this report studies of the land situation in the Philippines have been almost without number since the days of William Howard Taft2 and that further consideration by learned committees without action would accomplish little.
Because of the importance of this program and its urgency in light of the present political situation, I recommend most strongly that the Department instruct the Embassy to support the proposed plan if it meets with the approval of the appropriate technical authorities. We would appreciate an answer in the shortest time possible. I might also suggest that it would be worthwhile to obtain the views of Mr. Stanley Andrews, Director of the Office of Foreign Agricultural Relations, Department of Agriculture.
Sincerely yours,