Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, The American Republics, Volume IV

720.5 MSP/12–2352

The Under Secretary of State (Bruce) to the Secretary of Defense (Lovett)¹

secret

[Washington,] December 23, 1952.

My Dear Mr. Secretary: I believe you should be advised of this Department’s concern regarding certain proposals of the Defense Department respecting implementation of the grant-aid military assistance program now being conducted under the Mutual Security Act of 1951, as amended, for certain Latin American countries. As you are aware, each Latin American Government with whom we have concluded a Bilateral Military Assistance Agreement has agreed to make available for United States administrative expenses such amounts of local currency as may be agreed during subsequent negotiations between the United States and the other Government. The Department of State is prepared to commence these negotiations at the earliest practicable date. However, it is essential, if we are to promote Latin American good-will, rather than ill-will, toward the program, that United States administrative costs to be met out of local currency be reduced to the minimum.

Strict economy of costs to be borne by the Governments participating in the Latin American program is essential for a number of reasons. First, the relatively poor economic condition of some countries, such as Ecuador, may make it difficult for them to bear even the cost of minimum United States administrative requirements. Secondly, some Governments may need to obtain appropriations of funds to meet United States requirements from their legislatures, in which case, United States requirements for implementing the program will be exposed to full public scrutiny and become the subject of heated parliamentary and public debate. Thirdly, communist and nationalist elements in Latin America already have made political capital by attacking the Bilateral Military Assistance Agreements, and these elements may be expected to make an issue of large local currency payments in an effort to promote further ill-feeling toward the United States. Finally, if we are to make progress toward the goal of assuring maximum military, economic and political cooperation from Latin American countries during global war, it is essential that all of our Latin American programs and relationships be carried out in a manner best calculated to promote maximum goodwill toward the United States.

The Department of State is particularly concerned regarding the size of Military Assistance Advisory Groups proposed by the Department of Defense and regarding the high cost to the other Governments of mobile training teams planned for the program. Sizeable United States military training missions, which are maintained at the expense of the other Governments, have been operating in most Latin American countries for a number of years. They would appear to be ideally suited to discharge most, if not all, of the responsibilities of the Defense Department under the program, particularly the training of Latin American armed forces in the use of programmed equipment. It would seem possible, by effectively using existing mission personnel, to reduce the number of MAAG personnel and the number of mobile training teams proposed by the Defense Department, and thus to effect a considerable economy on behalf of the other Governments without jeopardizing U.S. interests in the program. Accordingly, this Department suggests consideration of the formula set forth in the following numbered paragraphs as a practicable line of approach to the other Governments during forthcoming negotiations for local currency.

1. The other Government would be requested to receive a Chief of MAAG and one clerical or administrative assistant and to provide local currency required for the maintenance of these personnel during the current fiscal year.

2. The other Government would be informed that United States military training missions will provide training in the use of programmed equipment, whenever possible. When necessary and practicable, non-specialists now assigned to the training missions would be replaced by specialists competent to train in the use of programmed equipment. The other Government would be informed that it might be necessary to increase mission complements slightly, but that the assignment of additional personnel would be kept to a minimum.

3. The other Government would be informed that additional mission personnel would be assigned only with the consent of the other Government. Local currency required for the maintenance of additional personnel would be obtained in the customary manner by means of an exchange of notes with the other Government prior to the assignment of individual personnel.

4. The other Government would be informed that failure to permit the assignment of required personnel, or failure to provide local currency for the maintenance of such personnel, would raise the question of whether the other Government was fulfilling its commitment under the Bilateral Military assistance Agreement.

5. In countries where a Service Department is contributing to the program, but where that Service Department maintains no training mission, personnel required by that Service Department would be assigned to the Office of the Chief of MAAG.

This formula would: (a) permit effective use of existing training mission personnel; (b) in most countries, obviate the need for sizeable MAAGs and expensive mobile training teams; (c) minimize the amount of local currency initially requested from the other Governments and permit them to provide any additional currency required by the U.S., at the time the need arose for additional U.S. personnel in the other countries; (d) reduce the amount of local currency required by the State Department for administrative support to MAAGs.

If the foregoing formula is acceptable to the Defense Department, the Department of State would appreciate receiving precise local currency requirements of the Defense Department, determined in accordance with this line of approach, so that negotiations with the other Governments for local currency may be commenced at the earliest possible date.

Sincerely yours,

David Bruce

1. Drafted by Mr. Spencer on Dec. 15, 1952; cleared with the Office of the Special Assistant to the Secretary for Mutual Security Affairs, and the Bureau of Inter-American Affairs.