Office of the Historian

255. Memorandum From Secretary of Agriculture Freeman to President Johnson1

Washington, December 1, 1965.

SUBJECT

  • India—Food and Agriculture
I.
For the first time the Indian Government through its Agricultural Minister Subramaniam has made concrete specific commitments to the United States which will if carried out vigorously significantly improve India’s agricultural performance.
II.
The critical question remains—How the United States can make certain that pledges are followed by performance.
III.
It is expected that the Indian Government in the near future will make a public pronouncement on agriculture incorporating the agreed upon actions and targets with a commitment to accomplish them. Subramaniam indicated to me the likelihood that he would be speaking to the Council of State on December 8 to spell out a plan of action to meet the current crisis and that he would incorporate the commitments made at Rome in such a presentation.
IV.
The public commitment by the Indian Government can be reinforced by the United States as follows:
(a)
Length of Public Law 480 agreements can be conditioned to the performance of the Indian Government.
(b)
The agricultural action commitments can be incorporated into the AID arrangements with disbursements conditioned on the Indian Government meeting its agricultural commitments. Precise detailed criteria to measure performance and insure action can be negotiated. Failure on the part of the Indian Government to perform will be surfaced under such a procedure and the appropriate action decision can be made accordingly.
V.
The following sequence of actions might be followed:
(a)
Communicate to Prime Minister Shastri that spelling out as the plan of the Indian Government the commitments made in Rome would be favorably received by the United States Government.
(b)
United States announce another short term P.L. 480 agreement.
(c)
Following Indian Government public commitment perhaps through Subramaniam’s proposed December 8 speech to the Council [Page 482] of State, U.S. Government would then compliment the Indian Government on strong new efforts and announce the opening of negotiations for a further extension of P.L. 480 for a longer period (but still limited).
(d)
When the U.S. Government resumes negotiations for economic assistance it will be made perfectly clear privately that assistance will be geared to the Indian performance in meeting their agricultural commitments and targets. In the alternative the President might direct that negotiations quietly resume prior to the Shastri visit. Such negotiations could provide a useful backdrop for the President’s use at the time of the Shastri visit.
VI.

Some personal observations:

Recent events and my meeting with Subramaniam in Rome encourage me where Indian agriculture is concerned.

1.
It appears that the Prime Minister is at last convinced of the need to depart from traditional agriculture techniques and use modern inputs, such as chemical fertilizer.
2.
It appears that the Prime Minister’s attitude which hitherto might be described as Fabian Socialist toward agricultural development has changed. Today agriculture commands a position at the top rather than at the bottom of the totem pole in priorities.
3.
Recent public statements by the Prime Minister substantiate the changed attitude and increased attention now given to agriculture.
4.
Food and Agricultural Minister Subramaniam impressed me. He has drive and ability. He appears to hold a strong position in the Indian Cabinet and to have a good deal of political skill. He has been a steadfast supporter of the United States.
VII.
Finally, it is my judgment, supported by the Indian specialists on my staff, that India can make the grade. It does have the physical resources. Its soils are for instance inherently far superior to those of Japan. Now that the Indian Government is targeting its goals and appears to be giving necessary priority in allocating its resources and we have some strong leverage to insist that they continue to do so, I believe significant progress can be made. It will be slow and tough, but it can be done.
  1. Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, NSC History, Indian Famine, August 1966–February 1967, Vol. I. No classification marking.↩