53. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Poland0
1199. Re: Embtel 1344.1 In order to evaluate suggestions Reftel Dept requires elaboration several points. (1) Re publicity reftel speaks of full and fair public recognition of past aid. Embassy has earlier reported factual coverage last agreement front pages major papers as well as items covering first and second deliveries. As Embassy aware Dept. has insisted Polish press carry news of PL 480 agreements in pursuance US objective that Polish people be informed of US origin needed commodities. Embassy has reported that Polish people aware PL 480 assistance. Request Embassy indicate specific deficiencies press coverage, keeping in mind US objectives this regard as well as inherent limitations such coverage. (2) Reftel mention of US desiderata implies specific conditions or concessions against which level agreement should be balanced. Dept has recently informed Poles continued failure deal with dollar bonds can affect economic relations. In pursuit aim of increasing normal procurement agricultural commodities by Poles, we required Poles purchase 200,000 MT feed grains and now considering package purchase cotton under which portion would be cash or short-term credit with remainder PL 480. Leverage these or other elements bilateral relations limited by fact that current Polish request understood as supplementary December agreement and new conditions or terms raise questions including that of good faith. Request indication specific desiderata Embassy believes Dept should seek associate current Polish request in light above comments.
US policy since 1957 and most recently stated in draft Polish guidelines paper2 and Embtel 6533 holds that PL 480 agreements are a key element in pursuit overall objectives. These include objectives affected directly by agreements themselves (preservation non-socialized agriculture, welfare Polish population), as well as others which less directly affected (ability maintain various programs and contacts). Re former, size agreements obvious factor in effective pursuit objectives, although, of course, actual determination of size various agreements based upon [Page 110] complex of factors. Re latter, evaluation in terms of balance against size PL 480 agreements extremely difficult if possible at all.
Policy further recognizes leverage derived from agreements while acknowledging limitations ability cause shifts Polish policy. Dept fully shares Embassy belief that leverage should be used where possible meet US objectives or influence Polish actions but considers essential this be considered in light total objectives.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 411.4841/3–362. Confidential. Drafted by Wortzel; cleared by Vedeler, Katz, and Blumenthal; and approved by Davis.↩
- Telegram 1344, March 3, suggested that the United States take a firmer line in negotiations for a new P.L. 480 agreement, including an insistence that adequate publicity be given to U.S. aid. (Ibid.)↩
- “Guidelines for Policy and Operations in Poland,” August 14, 1961. (Ibid., S/P Files: Lot 69 D 121, Poland)↩
- Document 44.↩
- “Comments on Recent Polish PL–480 Requests,” March 1. (Department of State, Central Files, 411.4841/3–162)↩
- In telegram 1429 from Warsaw, March 15, Ambassador Cabot reiterated the need for “full and fair” Polish recognition of U.S. aid, adding “my opinion is that we should seek to balance accounts more evenly beginning with the pending negotiations.” (Ibid., 411.4841/3–1562)↩