Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume IX, International Development and Economic Defense Policy; Commodities

45. Memorandum From the Administrator of the Agency for International Development (Bell) to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)¹

Washington, October 23, 1965.

This responds to your memorandum of October 6th regarding the world food situation and U.S. food aid policy.²

We agree with the guidelines and with the additions suggested by Secretary Freeman to points II.1. and II.2. to make them consistent with point I.5.

Dave

Attachment

Washington, October 11, 1965.

Memorandum From Secretary of Agriculture Freeman to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)

SUBJECT

• Comments on Guidelines Incorporated in “Suggestions for Position To Be Taken by U.S. Officials in Discussing the World Food Situation and U.S. Food Aid Policy”

These guidelines are helpful. I believe they would be even more useful if expanded somewhat in accord with the following suggestions. These suggestions do not change the principal impact of the guidelines presented, but I think they help to resolve some possible inconsistency between the items listed under I. and those under II.

Add to II.1.

Any indication of change in U.S. food aid policy, except for the increased emphasis on relating food aid to the economic development, especially agricultural development, in the LDC’s.

(This would make this item consistent with Item I.5.)

Add to II.2.

Any comment on the Administration’s view of next year’s P.L. 480 legislation, except to note that the Administration is studying whether (and what) changes may be needed to meet Item I.5.

Item II.3. is not clear as it is now phrased, and should be either clarified or deleted. U.S. farm policy is obviously related to food aid at present if only because food aid comes from surplus stocks (primarily) and the volume of surplus stocks depends on farm policy. No official could deny this. The Secretary of Agriculture gets constant questions on this matter.

I would therefore suggest deleting Item II.3. Instead, a seventh item could be added under I. to indicate that it would be appropriate to note that, while policies relating to domestic agriculture and policies relating to food aid do complement each other, neither should be dependent on the other.

Item No. II.4. is acceptable as it is.

1. Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Subject File, U.S. Food Aid Policy [2 of 2], Box 15. No classification marking. A handwritten note on the source text reads: “Francis: I seem to have got ahead of this last week (I promulgated a version not the one Ag suggests)—will you straighten out?” Attached to the source text are five additional documents; the first attachment is printed below. The second, not printed, an October 20 memorandum from Buddy to Secretaries Rusk and Freeman and Administrator Bell, states: “On October 6 I circulated to you a draft memorandum on the above subject. I have now heard from the Department of State that it is in complete agreement with these guidelines, and I have had no complaint from any other agency. Accordingly, I hope that we can all now agree to follow these guidelines until we get different instructions from the President.” A copy of the third attachment and its cover memorandum (the fourth attachment) are printed as Document 41. The fifth attachment, not printed, from Department of State Executive Secretary Benjamin H. Read to Buddy, is another covering memorandum to Document 41. It states: “The appropriate offices within the Department have reviewed your enclosed memorandum on the World Food Situation and US Food Policy. We are in complete agreement with the statement and the present guideline form.”
2. Document 41.