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

OAS files, lot 60 D 665, “Memorandums of meetings”

Memorandum of a Meeting of Certain Members of the United States Delegation¹

confidential

[Quitandinha,] November 30, 1954.

• Participants: Mr. Hoover
• Mr. Holland
• Mr. Overby
• Mr. Waugh
• Mr. Edgerton
• Mr. FitzGerald
• Mr. Parker²
• Mr. Cale

The following subjects were discussed:

1. Sales of Agricultural Products to Latin American Countries Under PL 480

Mr. Holland indicated that he favored providing Brazil with 250,000 tons of wheat this fiscal year under PL 480 with no definite commitment as to the amount for future years. Dr. FitzGerald indicated that since we are thinking in terms of 400,000 tons of wheat for Brazil during the next calendar year, he would be in favor of discussing this figure with the Brazilians. Mr. Waugh spoke in favor of the 250,000 ton figure and Dr. FitzGerald said he would not press his position. It was the sense of the group that an effort should be made to settle as many as possible of the PL 480 programs for the Latin American countries during the course of this Conference. It was agreed that there would be a meeting at 11:00 a.m.³ on the matter and that at this meeting an attempt would be made to come to some definite decisions.

2. Financing Economic Development

Mr. Overby stated that he had gotten the impression from conversations with Latin American representatives that their reaction to the statement⁴ which he had made yesterday morning had been favorable. Other members of the group indicated that they had received a similar impression from their conversations.

Mr. Overby then referred to the working group redraft⁵ of Resolution 1 of the ECLA Secretariat.⁶ He stated that he had indicated provisional approval of the redraft subject to being able to check it in its English version, that version at this time not being available, and subject to confirmation by his Delegation. Following the reading of the redraft, Mr. Hoover asked if there were any objections. There being none, it was agreed that Mr. Overby would confirm his approval.

Mr. Overby then read the working group’s redraft⁵ of Recommendation 2 of the ECLA Secretariat⁷ which he had also provisionally accepted. There being no objection to this by the members of the group, Mr. Hoover indicated that Mr. Overby should go ahead and confirm his provisional acceptance of the resolution.

Mr. Overby next referred to the Ecuadoran resolution⁸ which would have provided special preference for the Latin American countries in investment designed to encourage the production of primary products. Mr. Overby indicated that he was thinking of proposing that this be changed to indicate that careful consideration should be given to the effects on the Latin American countries of investments made in other foreign countries for the production of primary products produced in Latin America. He also stated that he thought that the resolution should be drafted in such a way as to refer to public investment.

Dr. FitzGerald asked about the possible reaction back home to a statement that might be interpreted as meaning that we would favor investment in raw material production abroad as compared with such investment in the United States. Mr. Cale inquired whether what was contemplated in the Ecuadoran resolution did not relate solely to foreign investment e.g. by the United States without any implication of a preference or special consideration for investment in the Latin American countries as compared with investment in the United States. He suggested that the resolution might be drafted to refer to foreign investment only. Mr. Hoover suggested that Mr. Overby ask that this be done.

Mr. Holland stated that the only thing that would give him concern regarding the resolution, with the changes that had been suggested, was not the language itself but its implications. He then inquired whether there was any chance of phrasing the resolution in universal terms so that it would provide that in making public foreign investment to encourage the production of raw materials, consideration should be given to “traditional sources of supply and marketing arrangements”. He suggested that an attempt be made by Mr. Overby first to get approval of general language along these lines and that if this could not be done that he recede to the position which would provide that careful attention would be given to the effect on Latin American countries of public foreign investment in other foreign countries to increase the production of primary products which the Latin American countries produce.

Mr. Overby next referred to the working group redraft⁹ of the Colombian resolution proposing consultation of central banks on temporary exchange difficulties and on the modification of IMF quotas. There was general agreement with his view that we could not approve the resolution in this form. Mr. Holland suggested that what is needed was a “warm abstention” based on our position that the resolution constitutes an invasion into the sphere of activities of international organizations of which we and most of the Latin American countries are all members.

3. Future Economic Conferences

Mr. Holland pointed out that there are certain representatives at this conference who favor the adoption of a resolution to hold meetings similar to the one in which we are now engaged every year. Others favor holding such meetings every two years. He also pointed out that there has long been a commitment to hold an economic conference in Argentina. He then suggested that we might try to avoid committing ourselves to any fixed schedule so far as future conferences are concerned by agreeing to a conference in Buenos Aires in 1956. This line of action was approved.

1. Drafted by Mr. Cale.
2. Jameson Parker, News Division, Department of State.
3. No record of the referenced meeting was found in Department of State files.
4. Apparent reference to the statement made by Mr. Overby in Subcommittee B (Financing) of Committee II (Economic Development) on Nov. 29 and released to the press on the same date indicating why the United States must abstain on the resolution concerning a regional financing institution.
5. Not printed.
6. Reference is to the recommendation titled “The Foreign Investment Target in Latin America,” contained on p. 129 in the report prepared by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) for submission to the Rio Economic Conference; for text of the report, see International Cooperation in a Latin American Development Policy (New York, 1954). ECLA Recommendation 1 became the basis for Resolution 64/54, titled “Increase in Foreign Investments in Latin America,” subsequently adopted by the conference; for text of the resolution, see USDel Report: Quitandinha, p. 62.
5. Not printed.
7. For text of the recommendation, titled “Participation of International Credit Institutions in Achieving the Investment Target,” see International Cooperation in a Latin American Development Policy, pp. 129–131. ECLA Recommendation 2 became the basis for Resolution 63/54, titled “Participation of International Credit Institutions in the Promotion of Economic Development in Latin America,” subsequently adopted by the conference; for text of the resolution, see USDel Report: Quitandinha, pp. 60–61.
8. The original draft of the referenced resolution was revised as a result of joint consultation between Ecuador, Chile, and the United States; documentation concerning the process of revision is in Conference files, lot 59 D 95, CF 406 and 411. The revised version was approved by the conference as Resolution 65/54; for text, see USDel Report: Quitandinha, p. 63.
9. Not printed.