Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume IX, Foreign Economic Policy

171. Letter From Secretary of State Rusk to Secretary of Defense McNamara⁰

Washington, July 26, 1963.

Dear Bob: I refer to your letter of July 9 regarding the importance of the sale of United States military equipment to our allies.¹ I received a copy of NSAM 242 of May 9 and it was circulated to our officers concerned, who have well in mind the President’s interest in U.S. military sales programs to allies such as Australia.

Even apart from the President’s memorandum, we have of course strongly supported military sales programs which are not inconsistent with other foreign policy considerations. In this connection, I have in mind such questions as the degree to which military sales to any specific country could divert resources from higher priority economic development objectives, particularly where we are extending economic aid to that country, and the degree to which the arms which a country proposes to purchase are compatible with the objective of focusing its military resources on its internal defense as opposed to “arming against its neighbors”.

I had not interpreted the President’s memorandum as an injunction to disregard all such foreign policy considerations in pursuing these sales and I presume that it was not your intent that we should do so. Thus, in instances in which military sales would be made either for cash or on credit from sources such as the Export-Import Bank, I would expect that we would be given the opportunity to provide political guidance in relating these sales to other foreign policy objectives, while also taking into account NSAM 242.

In other cases, where there is a potential competition for MAP funds between military sales and grant military assistance, I would hope that our two Departments could collaborate fully, taking into account my responsibilities under Section 622(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. As you know, I have delegated this authority to the Administrator of AID,² who acts in consultation with the Under Secretary and the Deputy Under Secretary for Political Affairs. I expect, of course, to be brought into these matters directly when this seems called for. I would thus expect that Dave Bell would have the primary role in the coordinated consideration of the issues involved in such cases. The appropriate bureaus of the State Department would, of course, also continue to be involved. I am sure that we can thus continue to collaborate most effectively in pursuing the objectives desired by the President with respect to our military sales and other objectives.

With warm regards,

Sincerely,

Dean³

0. Source: Department of State, S/S-NSC Files: Lot 72 D 316, NSAM No. 242. Confidential. Copies were sent to McGeorge Bundy and Bell. The source text is Tab D to U. Alexis Johnson’s undated memorandum to Secretary Rusk; see the source note, Document 170.
1. Document 170.
2. See CA-11942 to Chiefs of Mission of all AID recipient countries, April 24, 1962, in the Supplement.
3. Printed from a copy that indicates Rusk signed the original.