790.5/9–154
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs (Baldwin)
Subject:
- SEATO Treaty
Participants:
- Mr. F. J. Blakeney, Counselor, Australian Embassy
- Charles F. Baldwin—Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary
At luncheon, Mr. Blakeney raised the question of the economic article (Article III) of the U.S. draft of the SEATO Treaty1 and said that his Government was very much interested in what might be said and done at the Manila Conference with respect to economic assistance for Asia.
In response to a direct question, Mr. Baldwin outlined arguments used against using SEATO as the vehicle for an economic organization or program, including:
- (1)
- The very limited participation of Asian countries in SEATO;
- (2)
- The fact that neither Japan nor India would be a party; and
- (3)
- The unrealism of expectations that the so-called “uncommitted” countries of Asia would be willing to participate in an economic organization which was a part of a collective security organization which they were unwilling to join.
Mr. Baldwin explained that the U.S. belief that an economic organization should not be built up within the SEATO framework should not be regarded as indicating any lack of appreciation of the desirability and importance of achieving economic improvement in the countries of free Asia or unwillingness on the part of the U.S. to discuss this important matter with its friends. Mr. Blakeney said that he could accept the arguments mentioned but felt that a negative position with respect to a SEATO economic organization left unanswered the important question of what should be done to improve economic conditions in Free Asia, a matter which was of great interest to his Government. How, he asked, could SEATO members cooperate in a large economic program for Asia.
Mr. Baldwin referred to the Colombo Plan as an existing mechanism for such cooperation and mentioned the recently announced willingness of Australia to sponsor Japan’s application for membership in the Colombo Plan organization. Mr. Blakeney admitted that the Colombo Plan was a suitable mechanism but said that it had been hampered by lack of funds since its inception. In response to repeated inquiries by Mr. Blakeney as to what the U.S. had in [Page 828] mind with respect to a more effective organization or economic program for free Asia, Mr. Baldwin expressed the personal opinion that, at some appropriate time after the SEATO treaty matter had been disposed of, the question might well be discussed between the U.S. and its allies, including Australia. He asked Mr. Blakeney if his government had any specific plans in mind except its interest in commodity price stabilization agreements which were referred to in a recent aide-mémoire. Mr. Blakeney said that he was not well informed on the subject but would endeavor to obtain additional information from Canberra.
Mr. Blakeney referred to the aide-mémoire which the Australian Ambassador had delivered to Secretary Dulles yesterday,2 and which expressed misgivings over the growing belief that the U.S. would oppose any kind of organization growing out of the SEATO treaty. He said that he had observed a pronounced change in the U.S. attitude on this point during the last six weeks culminating in the present U.S. position against even the establishment of a SEATO Council or a permanent seat at which a secretariat could be located. He said that his government, faced with the necessity of budgeting for military expenditures, required reasonably specific information with respect to the commitments which Australia would be asked to undertake with respect to the future defense of Southeast Asia. Canberra felt that SEATO, if it were to have any real significance, should provide a planning mechanism to produce invaluable information as a part of the development of over-all defense plans.