Office of the Historian

546. Telegram From the Embassy in Afghanistan to the Department of State1

Kabul, February 21, 1968, 1130Z.

3185. Subject: PL–480 Title I: RGA Proposal of 8/30/67.

1.
We are concerned about consequences further delay authority negotiate new Title I agreement PL–480. If unable proceed by March 1 at latest, anticipate deterioration prospects solution troublesome economic matters outstanding between USG and RGA, with consequent unfavorable effects RGA self-help efforts.
2.
Would remind Dept RGA request has been pending with USG almost six months. Washington approval negotiation appeared imminent last December and again mid-January. Deliveries wheat Kabul can hardly now be made current crop year. This however, is less significant than role of new agreement in total American aid package for Afghanistan and hoped-for impact of latter on Afghan economic policies. In light other developments affecting US assistance Afghanistan, if we appear hesitate further on PL–480, RGA will surely begin wonder whether basic change American policy toward Afghanistan has occurred.
3.
RGA has recently completed economic negotiations with Soviets which in Afghan eyes appear have been in many respect less troublesome than negotiations with US—particularly re commodity assistance. However, our main concern lies in other areas.
4.
RGA at last appears ready move on long-term solution vexatious trust fund problem. We can hardly imagine RGA going through with this, however, until we have made firm offer on PL–480.
5.
Deadlines for RGA budget decisions FY beginning March 22 are rapidly approaching. We understand RGA plans to include trust fund payments in budget from now on. Early assurance on PL–480 will be essential to assure such item included in budget. Moreover, anticipated proceeds proposed PL–480 agreement will play important role in determining magnitude next development budget. Loss of confidence our intentions could lead to serious cutback overall level RGA development spending, at time when economy in doldrums, and could even lead to cuts in RGA’s top-priority agricultural production program.
6.
We therefore urge prompt authorization negotiate.
Blood
  1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967–69, AID (US) 15–8 AFG. Confidential; Priority.↩