460. Letter from Hodges to Feldman, September 191
This refers to our telephone conversation yesterday regarding the cable on woolen textile discussions.
I had just finished talking to George Ball about the same matter. My concern was not with sending the cable to correct any impression that the U.S. Government had changed its mind or would not live up to its promises. (Even though it could have been bad judgment to have made the original promises.)
My concern was the same that I expressed quite strongly on wool, you may recall, at our last Cabinet Level Textile Committee Meeting, namely that, with the delays indicated at that meeting and in the cable, we were going to be in serious trouble again.
It was entirely my fault that I momentarily forgot about the promises given other nations regarding wool textiles when I very honestly answered a question as to how the President’s promise to hold wool imports at “current levels” could be implemented.
But as I indicated to George, the cable intimated to other nations that we wouldn’t discuss the woolen import situation until after the International Wool Meeting, which I understand has been postponed until December. This procedure, if made public as it surely will be, will make things embarrassing to all of us including the President because I am sure as I can be that the import situation will worsen as the weeks and months pass.
We were in rather serious trouble last spring on our short-term agreement because of delays and “international” arguments by State Department representatives. Although relations have since improved and all of us are becoming more realistic, I don’t think we are out of the woods. Unless we are continually realistic, positive, firm and timely, we shall be in trouble with the long-term cotton textile arrangement.
[Facsimile Page 2]And I reiterate that the wool textile situation is getting worse and unless, as George Ball said to me yesterday, “without necessarily waiting for the International Wool Meeting we are going to find ways and means to implement the President’s decision”—(to hold imports at current levels which were around 17% at the time the President gave his promise to the Senators and even less than 17% when you wrote the Wool Manufacturers’ Association).
[Typeset Page 1835]So we still have before us the problem of what to do on wool but I am sure you agree with me that it must be solved. However, the textile situation is just a part of a larger problem we face in our relationships and our actions.
As much as I regret having to say it, I think I should point out, as a loyal member of the Administration and being interested in seeing that the President’s promises are met, whatever the industry or the circumstances, that the image of the State Department in negotiation or carrying out trade negotiations is not good. This “image” is held by the members of both houses of Congress and by the public, especially the business community. This is not generally true in other trading nations as there is much closer cooperation between business and government especially in world trade, and they do not mix as we do our political and our commercial.
Rightly or wrongly our lawmakers and our business people feel that the State Department (they usually except the Secretary of State as an individual) looks after the interests of other nations and doesn’t really try to protect the business interests of the U.S. This attitude, if true, might have been understandable 10–15 years ago when we were trying to help other nations get on their feet but not today when the USA is having real competition and continuing problems of trade and balance of payments.
I would fervently hope we can work much closer together in the various Departments especially at top levels for too many times we find the State Department making unilateral statements or “promises” rather than discussing with interested and affected agencies.
[Facsimile Page 3]I would hope also that we will be able to more clearly define our U.S. policy regarding our negotiations with other countries on trade and commercial matters.
Sincerely yours,
- Woolen import situation. No classification marking. 3 pp. Kennedy Library, Feldman Papers, Wool, Box 26.↩