838.00 TA/10–752: Airgram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Haiti 1
A–86. Reference Embassy Despatch Totec 17 October 7,2 concerning proposal of Raoul Aglion, UN Resident Representative, for US–UN participation in preparing a plan for economic development of Haiti.3 Department concurs with view of Embassy as to difficulties which such a proposal would present. In particular, the Department believes it inadvisable for this Government to prepare, or participate with a third party in the preparation of, an over-all economic development plan for a foreign government.
If a Latin American Government wishes to receive from the U.S. advice with respect to economic development plans, IIAA would prefer to make such advice available through the special assignment of a general economic consultant rather than through the TCA Mission generally. In the case of Haiti, consideration might be given to the furnishing of an economic consultant if the Haitian Government wished such an expert. However, since the furnishing of such advice is [Page 1254] within the terms of reference of Aglion, the Department would wish to be sure that both the Haitian Government and Aglion were perfectly clear as to the whole situation, in order that there might be no possibility of having Aglion’s role unwittingly superseded by a TCA expert. It will also be recalled that the report made in 19494 by the UN Mission of Technical Assistance to Haiti has already provided a basis for Haitian economic development planning. Department is, moreover, by no means certain that Haiti is ready for a more comprehensive blueprint for economic and social evolution along lines suggested by Aglion. Also not sure that Haitians are presently in a position to put such a plan into effect if it were adopted, since it might represent too large a project for the government to handle; or political changes in the government might later invalidate the work. Furthermore, the present 5-year $40 million development plan of the Haitian Government seems to be designed to accomplish many of the economic objectives set forth in the Aglion outline. On balance, it would appear preferable to recognize the limitations of the situation in Haiti, and to focus attention for the time being on individual integrated projects like the Artibonite.
On the other hand, the fact that the UN is thinking of forward planning of technical assistance is much to be commended, since they have all too often been criticized for acting on the basis of ad hoc requests as received by individual UN agencies from various governments, including Haiti. The U.S. would also be much interested in the preparation of any plan for technical assistance which might eventually be adopted, since such a plan would necessarily affect the content of TCA operations in Haiti for a good many years, and would also have a considerable effect upon the coordination of UN and U.S. activities. As a matter of general policy, we have consistently urged that coordination in the field should rise above the mere mechanics of avoiding duplication to a cooperative and intelligent integration of efforts and resources for the purpose of providing maximum benefit to the country concerned.
In the light of these considerations, you may wish to discuss this matter further with Aglion, indicating to him fairly candidly the consideration and interests which we have in this matter. It is suggested that you might wish to make two main points with Aglion, somewhat along the following lines:
- 1.
- If the UN after further consideration, believes it desirable to pursue its interest in Haitian economic development, also already evidenced by its report and recommendations of 1949, through the [Page 1255] preparation of a comprehensive development plan along the lines proposed by Aglion, U.S. would think it probably desirable not to become associated as a co-sponsor with such a plan at the present time, for the reasons stated above. However, the U.S. would naturally be much interested in the outcome, and would also be glad to assist in specific ways as appropriate, such as furnishing data, etc., so long as this did not involve any “sponsor” relationship.
- 2.
- U.S. representatives in Haiti, however, would be definitely willing to discuss with UN representatives and the Haitian Government the establishment of a list of priority technical assistance activities for immediate consideration and implementation—this representing something less comprehensive, yet more specific, than an over-all economic development plan. In the preparation of such priority activities, the U.S. would think it useful to have consideration given at the same time to the question of which activities might be undertaken respectively by the U.S. and UN.
A joint understanding along the lines indicated in point 2 above, between U.S. and UN representatives in Haiti and the Haitian Government, would be warmly welcomed in Washington and very likely in New York as well, as a real contribution in considering the planning of further technical assistance activities in Haiti.
We are sending a copy of this reply and the reference despatch to USUN (New York) in order that they may convey the substance of this matter confidentially and informally to the United Nations Technical Assistance Administration.
- Drafted by Philip M. Burnett of the Technical Cooperation Administration and Charles C. Hauch of the Institute of Inter-American Affairs; cleared with the Offices of Regional American Affairs and UN Economic and Social Affairs.↩
- Not printed (838.00 TA/10–752).↩
- A translation of a draft outline of the referenced plan as prepared by Mr. Aglion was transmitted to the Department of State under cover of despatch Totec 17.↩
- The report was published as Mission to Haiti, Report of the United Nations Mission of Technical Assistance to the Republic of Haiti (New York, 1949).↩