254. Department of State Policy Information Statement1
UNITED STATES-POLISH ECONOMIC AGREEMENT
[Here follow Sections I and II.]
[Page 635]III. Special Political Considerations for Guidance of United States Agencies and Officials
The agreement should be treated in a matter-of-fact manner and its significance under-emphasized rather than stressed. There should be no suggestion of wooing the Poles away from the Soviet bloc or of aligning them in a military sense on the side of the West. While we are anxious that Poland evolve in the direction of independence from the U.S.S.R., this is for Poland a most delicate operation, given her contiguous position, Soviet sensitivity to events at her borders, and the position taken by the Poles who have described the negotiations as directed toward “the normalization of economic relations between Poland and the United States.”
Discourage public commentary from United States sources to the effect that P.L. 480 sales will allow for certain beneficial adjustments in the new Polish economic plan. It is the chairman of the Polish Delegation who is expected to make clear how Polish purchases of United States agricultural commodities will fit into his country’s new economic program. This will avoid any implication that the United States is dictating terms of Polish economic policy. Polish statements may, of course, be used for credibility.
Consistent with the above, any discussion of the negotiations should not refer to them as “foreign aid” which inevitably carries the implication of a non-economic quid pro quo. Avoid reference to the fact that the Export-Import Bank credit is derived from Mutual Security funds, about which Poles are sensitive.
[Here follows a brief discussion of the nature of the agreements.]
Treatment to U.S.S.R.
In coverage directed toward the U.S.S.R. the agreements should be handled as items of straight news based on official documents. The fact that these are agreements between two equals is implicit in the official documents. While there should be no doubt that this is the fact, any over-emphasis of it from official sources will run the danger of “protesting too much.” No interpretative commentary should be used for Soviet audiences.
Treatment to Soviet Satellites (not including Poland)
Full news coverage is recommended to insure that the facts are adequately presented. Commentary should bring out the pertinent parts of the United States public position as laid out in the U.S. press release, but should avoid the appearance of urging the satellites to seek greater independence. Audiences should be allowed to draw the obvious conclusions themselves. Reference may be made to President Eisenhower’s statement of October 31, 1956, which mentioned United [Page 636] States readiness to assist independent governments economically, without demanding “their adoption of any particular form of society as a condition upon our economic assistance.”3 This statement of United States policy can probably best be given unobtrusively in the course of reporting responsible press comment if an article can be found which quotes the President on this.
[Here follows additional discussion of the agreements.]
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 511.00/6–757. Confidential. Enclosure to circular instruction CA–10442, June 7, sent to various diplomatic posts worldwide and to the USIA and other interested agencies in Washington. Recipients were requested “to make it available to appropriate officers of USIS and other interested U.S. agencies as assigned to your posts.” Drafted by A.J. Cefaratti of E and S.C. Lyon of EE and cleared with EUR, EE, and BNA.↩
- See Document 149.↩