791.5 MSP/10–2852
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in India (Bowles)1
official–informal
Dear Chet: I have read your letters of October 28 and November 19 with great interest. Your thoughtful analysis has been given wide circulation and careful attention. We are in complete agreement with you that a free India is of great importance not only to world stability but also to the future security of the United States. We also believe with you that if India is to remain a democratic nation it is essential that visible economic progress be made in India in the next few years.
As you know, the Department of State has repeatedly put these points to other interested agencies and members of Congress and has tried to make it clear that the economic progress necessary to maintain internal political stability in India can be realized only if technical and economic assistance in substantial amount is made available from the United States.
During the period you have been in New Delhi, our political relations with India have developed most favorably. We have also made a good start in the economic development field. In view of India’s tremendous significance to us in our dealings with Asia and the United Nations, we must clearly intensify this policy of closer friendship and broader cooperation.
Despite our common efforts to bring home to the members of the Congress and the American people as a whole the need—in our own security interest—for providing substantial United States assistance to India, the amounts made available under the Mutual Security Program of the last two years have fallen short of those requested by this Department. Nevertheless, the appropriations have been sufficient to permit a successful and auspicious beginning of our joint effort and have served to establish the working organization necessary for close cooperation between the two Governments and for the implementation of the Indian development program.
[Page 1683]It was fortunate indeed that India had the initiative to plan and begin a program of economic development. It is more than a plan on paper and represents great effort on the part of India. It truly gives us a chance to help India to help itself. India’s success not only will be significant in terms of benefits to India and the United States, but also will hearten and stimulate other underdeveloped countries of the world which are striving to overcome economic difficulties similar in many respects to those of India.
How this can best be done not only for India but for the rest of our friends is the question that has occupied our thoughts for some time now. We have not answered the question to our complete satisfaction thus far, although we do believe that we have arrived at a workable approach. The incoming administration may, of course, regard these problems differently but I think that the importance of a stable and democratic South Asia to United States security will continue to argue for the provision of substantial economic aid in that region.
Two of your specific points relate to the need for $250 million for fiscal year 1954 and as clear an authorization as we can obtain from the new Congress for a program of three years’ duration, to help India complete its five year economic development plan.
To meet your first point, the Department proposed to the Bureau of the Budget a fiscal year 1954 aid program for India of $231 million plus $51 million as India’s share of a Basic Materials Development Program, all included in an overall Mutual Security Program of $7.8 billion. As a result of cuts and restorations, the total 1954 program that will be proposed by the present administration totals $7.6 billion. No final breakdowns have been made by country, but it may be anticipated that the Indian share will approach $200 million, thus going far toward meeting your suggestions.
As far as a long term authorization is concerned, we have recommended to the President that in his budget message to the Congress he include a statement recommending a continuing aid program for India. This will not necessarily take the form of a monetary sum as was the case with the original Economic Cooperation Administration request. What is important is to make clear the general understanding that such a program as we now envisage is one that will necessarily require several years to accomplish, and that it is necessary both for the countries receiving aid and for the United States to recognize that forward planning, supported by an appropriately safeguarded assurance on our part to continue with our contributions, is an essential to success.
Needless to say this same thread of long-range interest runs through our programs of assistance to other countries, and what we plan for India must be considered in the context of what we can afford to do now and undertake in future years for other nations in the Near East, the Far East, Europe and elsewhere.
[Page 1684]I was pleased to have the comments in your November 19 letter on the advantages of the type of developmental goods program proposed by the Department for Fiscal Year 1954. The modifications you propose will be given careful consideration.
In the best interests of the United States, India must be encouraged and helped to remain in the democratic free world. Such encouragement can best be given by an acceleration in the rate of Indian economic development, with the consequent rise in the standard of living of the Indian people; to help accomplish this, substantial funds must be made available in the next few years from the United States for technical and economic assistance.
I believe that while our assistance is of tremendous importance to the success of the Indian Government’s development plans, what the Indian Government itself does or fails to do is the determining factor. I believe further that we should continue our assistance and enlarge its scope for the next few years. This we should do despite our common understanding that we cannot make absolutely certain the success of democracy in India regardless of what we do or how much money we spend. Our duty to the American people requires us to take every positive step to avert India’s being lost to the free world through default. In my estimation no single step is more important than technical and developmental aid.
I shall make your letters available to Mr. Dulles2 and to Mr. Stassen, in the certainty that your provocative and thoughtful analysis will be helpful to all concerned with steering these programs through the new Congress.
Sincerely yours,
- This letter was drafted by Delaney and Michael G. Kelakos of SOA.↩
- Assistant Secretary of State Byroade on Feb. 6, 1953 sent this letter and Ambassador Bowles’ letters of Oct. 28 and Nov. 19, 1952 to Secretary of State Acheson under cover of a memorandum to Secretary of State John Foster Dulles (791.5 MSP/2–653).↩