Office of the Historian

188. Memorandum From the Under Secretary of State for Economic Affairs (Ball) to the Under Secretary of State (Bowles)0

Washington, September 9, 1961.

SUBJECT

  • Proposal for an IDY

I understand that the Secretary has referred to you the proposal developed by IO and S/P for a U.S. initiative in the 16th UNGA for making 1963 an International Development Year.1 Meanwhile, I have discussed the matter in some detail with Harlan Cleveland. Our discussion covered both the merits of the idea and my reservations about it. A new idea emerged from this discussion which is acceptable to both of us—that the IDY proposal be converted into a proposal for an International [Page 414] Development Decade. We believe the “IDD” alternative has the following advantages:

1.
All the arguments advanced in support of an IDY initiative would apply with equal or greater force to an IDD.
2.
The particular activities and functions envisaged for the IDY could be carried on much more effectively if extended over a longer period of time. In fact, it would be difficult to try to cram some of them into a single year. An IDD would obviously give us a better opportunity to develop programs having real substance, as contrasted with “showcase” programs.
3.
We have already strongly emphasized the need for thinking of economic development in long-range terms. In addition, President Kennedy has already referred to the 1960’s as the “decade of development.”2 There is no reason why 1963 should be regarded as having more significance than 1962 or 1964, for example.
4.
An IDY proposal might be regarded by many of the underdeveloped nations as a mere gimmick, or the type that might have been expected to emanate from the Eisenhower Administration. On the other hand, an IDD proposal would probably have considerable attractiveness, since it would imply a commitment by the UN and the advanced industrial nations to concentrate on the problem of economic development for a long period of time, and would permit the evolution of new functions and institutions which might be impracticable within a single year.
5.
The opportunities for developing genuine cooperation with other nations, possibly including even the Soviet Bloc, would be much better within the context of a decade rather than any particular year.

On the basis of the foregoing considerations, I hope you will agree that the IDY proposal should be converted into an IDD proposal, and will join in making a recommendation to this effect. If the proposal is recast in these terms, I would also be inclined to favor having it mentioned in the President’s speech at the UNGA.

George W. Ball3
  1. Source: Washington National Records Center, RG 286,AID Administrator Files: FRC 65 A 481, State Department, FY 1962. Confidential. The source text forms part of the daily log of the AID Executive Secretariat, September 12.↩
  2. This proposal is summarized in a memorandum from Cleveland to Secretary Rusk, August 30. (Department of State, Central Files, 398.00/8-3061)↩
  3. See footnote 1, Document 185.↩
  4. Printed from a copy that indicates Ball signed the original.↩