Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, South and Southeast Asia, Volume XV

552. Memorandum of a Conversation, Department of State, Washington, June 30, 1960, 4:15 p.m.¹

Washington, June 30, 1960, 4:15 p.m.

SUBJECT

• PL 480 Rice Disposal Consultations

PARTICIPANTS

• Thanat Khoman, Foreign Minister of Thailand
• Visutr Arthayukti, Ambassador of Thailand
• C. Douglas Dillon, Under Secretary of State
• U. Alexis Johnson, United States Ambassador to Thailand
• Harlan P. Bramble, OR
• Frank S. Wile, SEA/E

Foreign Minister Thanat and Ambassador Visutr called on Mr. Dillon by appointment at 4:15, June 30, 1960, pursuant to an oral understanding reached during the recent SEATO meeting, to discuss possible improvement in methods of consulting on PL 480 Title I disposals of rice.

Mr. Dillon stated that the King’s visit to the United States had been most successful to date and noted that the subject of improving rice consultations had been brought up in the June 29 conversation between the King and President Eisenhower. Mr. Dillon noted that, as agreed during the SEATO meeting, the US would be pleased to work out with Thailand a better system of consulting on Title I rice disposals. He stated that with regard to wheat disposals the US consulted regularly with other wheat exporters on a multilateral basis rather than bilaterally, transaction by transaction, and wondered whether such a system might not be applicable to rice disposals. If agreeable to Thailand and others, the US would be willing to sit down once or possibly twice a year with Thailand, Burma and Vietnam preferably in Washington to discuss rice exports, particularly Title I disposals in Asian markets. He thought such an informal device was more efficacious than attempting to use presently existing SEA study groups because these groups usually contained representatives of consuming countries. In US experience in wheat it had proved better to limit the consulting group to exporters. Mr. Dillon stated that the US would be prepared to be represented at the Assistant Secretary or Deputy Assistant Secretary level and supported by representatives of the Department of Agriculture for as long as it would take to freely exchange views and reach understanding on export goals and problems, indicating that such could probably be done in four or five days.

The Foreign Minister noted that the British had attempted to use the informal multilateral consultation device before and that it had not worked out well since consumers as well as producers were represented. He queried how the US envisaged such consultations would take place. Mr. Dillon stated that while multilateral consultations would be held at least once a year, semi-annual consultations could take place if desirable. Representation would be essentially among experts in rice who would discuss plans and problems in particular markets. A consultation of this kind would provide a means of getting together and should provide a new dimension to understanding common problems. Individual transactions would then be handled within the context of those consultations and would not require consultation unless they departed from the understanding reached during the previous multilateral consultation. Discussion would not be restricted to non-commercial sales but would include commercial sales as well.

As for timing of the first multilateral consultation meeting, the Foreign Minister stated that late December 1960 or January 1961 would be best for the three SEA countries since by that time their crop would have been harvested. It was noted that the US crop was harvested in the summer. Mr. Dillon accepted the Foreign Minister’s suggestion that the first consultation should be held in Washington during the first half of January 1961 since the Christmas Holidays would make the latter part of December impracticable. He agreed that the annual program for rice shipments to India as provided in the recent wheat-rice agreement with India should be discussed at these meetings. Mr. Bramble pointed out that the Indian agreement provided for an initial consultation with India in August. Mr. Dillon confirmed that this was the case and indicated that the US would have to consult bilaterally with Thailand on this matter.

The Foreign Minister noted that the global marketing concept does not satisfy Thai Government moods. He wondered whether it was not possible to unofficially ask receiver countries to purchase rice from specific countries. Mr. Dillon noted that similar problems had arisen with regard to wheat and that a satisfactory solution had usually been reached. The Foreign Minister also remarked that timing on specific rice offers was extremely important, noting that in the case of the recent wheat-rice deal with India, Thailand felt that it was given insufficient notice. Mr. Dillon said he now realized that in the desire to make it possible for Minister Patil³ to sign the agreement during his stay in Washington, there had probably been insufficient time allowed for meaningful consultations with SEA countries. Mr. Dillon stated that we would have no objection to discussing rice prices at the consultation meeting but we could not enter into a commodity agreement to fix rice prices. Foreign Minister Thanat stated that the multilateral consultation approach was fully acceptable to his government and assumed that the US would handle the matter of approaching Burma and Vietnam. Mr. Dillon replied that this would be done and that if Burma and Vietnam agreed, invitations would be extended to all three governments to hold the first meeting in January 1961. He stressed to the Foreign Minister the desirability that all three countries send their most technically qualified rice specialists to this meeting since we would be doing the same.

1. Source: Department of State, Conference Files: Lot 64 D 559, CF 1712. Confidential. Drafted by Wile. Foreign Minister Thanat Khoman also met separately with Secretary Herter on June 30 to discuss the situation in Cambodia; the memorandum of conversation is ibid.
3. S.K. Patil, Indian Minister of Food and Agriculture.