272. Letter From the President to His Consultant (Anderson)1
Dear Dillon: Your exposition of the national security effects of unrestricted crude oil imports strikes me as excellent.2 In the main I agree; I think I disagree only with one point which I find in the first paragraph on page six:
“At the same time our object should be to ensure that our economic and military strength do not become so dependent on the continued flow of Middle East oil that in time of crisis we would face the unacceptable alternatives of (a) resort to force to hold the source, or (b) suffer the crippling effect of its loss.”
I think that you have, in the analysis presented in the letter, proved that should a crisis arise threatening to cut the Western world off from Mid-East oil, we would have to use force. You specifically point out that an adequate supply of oil to Western Europe ranks almost equal in priority with an adequate supply for ourselves. You argue that while the Western Hemisphere can on an emergency basis meet the short term requirements of the entire free world, the implication is included that we cannot do this on the long term. Hence my disagreement with the statement to which I call your attention.
By this I mean that you prove the facts of the petroleum world are such that the West must, for self-preservation, retain access to Mid-East oil.
In general, however, I merely express the hope that our long term national objectives in this field can be spelled out and formalized so that they will mean something—in other words, that they will encourage maximum exploration in our country and use of imports as a supplemental, not a ruinous substitute, for our own production.
I was pleased that you were able to devote some of your time to the work of the Cabinet Committee. I know that you were a great help.
With warm regard,
Sincerely,3
- Source: Eisenhower Library, Project Clean Up.↩
- Reference is to Anderson’s letter of July 24, Document 267.↩
- Printed from an unsigned copy.↩