Italian Desk files, lot 57 D 56, “435—Aid to Italy”

No. 790
The Counselor of Embassy in Italy (Durbrow) to the Director of the Office of Western European Affairs (Jones)

confidential
official–informal

Dear Johnny: We appreciated the very useful letter that you sent me in connection with your cable on Defense Support Aid for Italy in FY ’56.1

I assume that by now you will have read the Country Team views on this subject in Embtel 1822, November 9,2 and will have noted that we strongly concur with your views that any economic aid for Italy in FY ’56 can be justified only on the basis of an adequate Italian political program, and that the problems of timing and tactics make it desirable to hide any sums tentatively earmarked for Italy somewhere in the legislative proposals so that the Italians will not find out about them.

The Ambassador has a somewhat more specific view on how this might be done than was actually expressed in our cable, and Tasca and Jacobs and I all think her idea contains a very attractive approach for Washington to consider. She suggests establishing some funds that would be made available to the President to allocate to countries that took “outstanding steps to strengthen the fabric of the free world” (or some suitable positive expression which would include the anti-Communist idea).

The establishment of such a fund would probably have several major advantages: (1) it might introduce a healthy competitive spirit among the countries all over the world which are afflicted with serious internal Communist problems and are seeking United States aid to combat it, for the reason that those who took the first, largest and most useful steps would then be eligible for aid; (2) it would be more saleable to the Congress than allocating funds to continue aid along the old lines to countries to carry out their programs and meet their problems, in the hope that they would afterwards be enabled to meet United States policy objectives (e.g., emasculate the Communist apparatus in Italy), something the Congress is probably tired of hearing, at least for Europe. It would [Page 1709] build directly into the conditions for appropriation a reward or “quid pro quo” for demonstrated performance instead of the idea of helping countries to meet their problems; and (3) it would provide the Administration with greater flexibility in allocating aid.

As for the specific amount to be tentatively earmarked for Italy, for the reasons pointed out in our cable it is difficult to give a figure now. But also it is very important that sources be available to compile a sizeable aid total for Italy, if this should turn out to be needed to accomplish major progress toward United States objectives. With the latter in mind, the current Washington tendency noted in your letter to limit severely the funds potentially available to Italy from surplus food sales under Title I of PL–480 is disturbing, since this seemed to us the most sizeable and flexible potential aid source. However, the existence of a sizeable global kitty of the type recommended by Ambassador Luce would be another answer to this problem.

Please let us have your reactions to these suggestions.3

With best regards,

Sincerely yours,

Durby
  1. Reference is to Jones’ letter of Nov. 5 and the attached joint State–FOA cable 1544 of the same day, neither printed. (Italian Desk files, lot 57 D 56, “435—Aid to Italy”)
  2. Telegram 1822 described in detail the Embassy’s thinking regarding the level of U.S. assistance to Italy for FY 1955 and 1956 and the tactics to be used in discussing this question with the Italian Government. (765.5 MSP/11–954)
  3. See Document 793.