Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume XXIX, Eastern Europe; Eastern Mediterranean, 1969–1972

22. Memorandum From C. Fred Bergsten of the National Security Council Staff to the Presidentʼs Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger)¹

Washington, February 26, 1971.

SUBJECT

• Stansʼ Proposals for (a) Another Eastern European Trade Mission, and (b) His Own Trip to Europe and the Near East

Eastern Europe Trade Mission

Secretary Stans has proposed that his Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Business, Harold B. Scott, lead a U.S. trade and investment mission to Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland and Rumania in June 1971. (Tab B)² The mission would consist mainly of senior representatives of U.S. firms. Stans believes that the mission is justified in order to demonstrate continued U.S. government interest in expanding trade to Eastern Europe. He says that the State Department has offered planning and staffing support.

Scott led a similar mission to Eastern Europe last June, and he has strongly supported increased trade with the Communist European countries in a number of public statements. In fact, with the full backing of Stans, he has tread on the edge of pushing a policy line contrary to the Presidentʼs own decisions. For example, on February 4 he told a Boston business group that Commerce and State had suggested that the President seek Most-Favored-Nation treatment for Communist products; this could have been the source of Senator Brookeʼs call to you on the subject.³ Scott also told the group that the Presidentʼs decision might be revealed in the State of the World report, for which there was of course absolutely no basis in fact. And he actively agitated for opposition to the Presidentʼs policy by saying that “political awareness of the tariff problem can be heightened by agitation by the business community for even broader trade…”

Stans himself has often given the same impression. In recent testimony before the Joint Economic Committee, the Journal of Commerce reported that he said that the only area in the world with potential for expanded U.S. exports was Eastern Europe—the obvious implication of which was that the business community should lobby for USG help to do so.

The President told Secretary Stans orally sometime back that he would not stand in the way of increased trade with Eastern Europe—apart from the USSR.⁴ However, I do not see how our present policy could condone a second trade mission within a year, with its strong implication that we favor expanded East-West trade, particularly in view of the Presidentʼs recent decision to defer any Administration initiatives in this area.⁵ (I held Stansʼ memo until the President made this decision.)

Secretary Stans has not specifically asked your permission for Scott to go, but Commerce will undoubtedly follow up to find out if the trade mission can proceed. You could of course let it pass or you could object in the name of the Presidentʼs policy. An objection would make it clearer to Stans that Commerce should be more restrained in its East-West trade statement.

Stansʼ Trip to Europe and the Near East

Secretary Stans has also (Tab C)⁶ asked for comments on his own planned trip in April and May to Ireland, Spain, Greece, Romania, Iran and Turkey. The only problem is the reaction he can expect in Spain if the President decides to agree with Stans on the need to increase shoe duties in response to the Tariff Commission report. Nevertheless, I see no reason to discourage his trip at this time.

Recommendation

That you sign the memorandum for Secretary Stans at Tab A, approving his trip in April and May but suggesting a delay before another trade mission to Eastern Europe (except of course to Romania and Yugoslavia).⁷

1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, Box 213, Agency Files, Commerce, (1971)–Vol. II. No classification marking. Sent for action. Concurred in by Sonnenfeldt and Saunders.
2. Attached but not printed.
3. Not further identified.
4. See footnote 7, Document 20.
5. See Document 21.
6. Attached but not printed.
7. Haig responded to Bergsten in an undated memorandum: “I have discussed this with Henry and he would like your memo rewritten as a memo for the President; also, he wants you to be sure and get Petersonʼs attitude and incorporate it in the memo for the President.” With Petersonʼs concurrence, Bergsten prepared a shortened memorandum from Kissinger to the President expressing similar views. Kissinger approved the revised text on Nixonʼs behalf and followed up on March 15 with a memorandum to Stans, in which he wrote: “The President fully approves your trip to Europe and the Near East during the period April 17 through May 3, 1971. He is particularly pleased at your intention to include Romania in your itinerary. There is doubt, however, about the need for a second trade and investment mission to Eastern Europe, which you raised in your earlier memorandum to me. I do not believe that the status of our relations with these countries, apart from Romania and Yugoslavia of course, justifies a second business mission within a year led by a Deputy-Assistant Secretary.” All three memoranda are in the National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, Box 213, Agency Files, Commerce (1971)–Vol. II.