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

Miller files, lot 53 D 26, “Peru”

The Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Miller) to the Ambassador in Peru (Tittmann)¹

secret
official–informal

[Washington,] March 5, 1952.

Dear Harold: Thank you for your detailed letter of February 25² reporting on and analysing the attitude of Peruvian officials, and especially President Odria, toward the military grant-aid program and the other assistance Peru has received or would like to receive from the United States in the military field. Before discussing the points raised, however, I should like to express the appreciation of those of us here particularly concerned with the grant-aid negotiations for the excellent and effective manner in which you and others similarly involved in Lima carried the negotiations with Peru to an expeditious and successful conclusion. It was a job very well done.

With reference to your impression that Peru is not enthusiastic about the grant-aid program because of its preoccupation with internal security, it is perhaps understandable that the transition from concepts of nationalistic self-interest to genuine adherence to the practice as well as the principle of collective defense will call for difficult adjustments both practical and psychological, and, in some cases, such as Mexico and Argentina, will not happen quickly. We can only hope to make some headway with the encouragement provided in the present program, and Peru’s participation is all to the good.

Insofar as Peruvian concern is related to the size of the program for that country, while I do not know all of the factors and considerations which led the Department of Defense to take up with Peru the particular tasks and units specified in the Military Plan, it seems to me that, as one of a relatively small number of countries approached with an offer of assistance to all three armed services, Peru has come out rather well. After all, the total program is not very large. Furthermore, there seems to be a slight inconsistency between preoccupation with internal defense and concern at not being cut in for more in the grant-aid program, which is so clearly directed at external military effort.

It is reassuring, however, that the President does not seem to consider that Peru’s needs for her immediate security should be on a grant basis. One of the most frequent adverse criticisms of our program has been the charge that, however closely its purposes and objectives may be tied to strengthening the hemisphere against the threat of Soviet imperialism, the assistance will actually be used for other purposes.

With regard to President Odria’s concern lest the grant-aid program will prejudice acquisition of military assistance on a reimbursable basis, there are several points to be considered. In the first place, it is entirely correct that participation in the grant-aid program will not prejudice acquisition on a reimbursable basis of equipment, etc., which is available and which is clearly needed by Peru to maintain her own defense. This does not mean, of course, that we can escape the fact that the capacity of this country to meet military requirements throughout the world limits availability, nor does it mean that we shall approve without question any request that Peru may wish to make. There are necessary limitations which must continue to be imposed.

One of the basic assumptions of the Peruvian position as reported in your letter appears to be that they have not been receiving fair or equitable treatment in the acquisition of military assistance on a reimbursable basis. When one compares what Peru has actually received with what Latin American countries of Peru’s size, or even larger, have received under the Mutual Defense Assistance Act of 1949, one is struck with the fact that Peru has not fared badly. In this connection, I have enclosed for the Embassy’s own information the latest cumulative figures of the transactions which have taken place under the MDAP with this area since October 1949, as of January 31, 1952.³

With respect to the pending request for a cruiser for Peru, this question is, I understand, far from being decided in Defense. No reply has as yet been received to the Department’s letter to Defense of January 5, 1952,⁴ requesting to be advised as to the military requirement of Peru for a heavy cruiser in relation to any mission she would be likely to perform in hemisphere defense. I believe a copy of this letter was sent to Lima informally. I shall see that you are kept currently advised on developments in regard to this request and appreciate receiving your views on it.

Sincerely yours,

Edward G. Miller, Jr.

1. Drafted by Duncan A. D. Mackay and Edward A. Jamison of the Office of Regional American Affairs.
2. Supra.
3. The enclosure attached to the source text shows that Peru received reimbursable military assistance valued at $1,343,236, an amount more than that received by any other Latin American country, except Argentina, Brazil, and Chile. A footnote to the figure for Peru, however, reads as follows: “This figure does not include the three D–E’s which have now been delivered to Peru. Their cost plus rehabilitation amounted to $4,425,000. With their delivery, Peru now probably leads all countries in value of items actually received.”
4. Not printed (723.5 MSP/1–552). The Department of Defense reply is printed on p. 1499.