Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XII, American Republics

46. Memorandum From the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (May) to the Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs (Martin)¹

Washington, August 13, 1962.

SUBJECT

• Recommendations for IA-ECOSOC Meeting in Mexico City

It is almost certain that the meeting will be convened on October 1 at the expert level and on October 22 at the Ministerial level. On the assumption, therefore, that one of the subjects to be covered at the expert level meeting will be preparation for decisions to be reached at the Ministerial meeting, we have about seven weeks in which to prepare our positions and, to the extent necessary, to obtain general understandings from the other participating countries so as to preclude serious conflicts at Mexico City. Two suggestions are summarized below, with the thought that steps should be undertaken as soon as possible to reach a general inter-American understanding with regard to those suggestions prior to the meeting:

I. That certain IA-ECOSOC subcommittees be constituted for the purpose of creating a multinational mechanism for evaluating the progress attained in Latin America under the Alliance for Progress, as well as for the purpose of promoting a more rapid rate of progress throughout the area. I believe it is obvious that the United States has accepted an undue share of the responsibility for evaluating and promoting the progress in each of the Latin American countries. The subcommittees suggestion is designed to promote as much responsibility as possible in each of the Latin American countries for the rate of progress in each of the others.

The specific suggestions set forth below may facilitate discussion of this subject:

A. Initially, there might be four subcommittees concerned, respectively, with fiscal reform, agrarian reform, educational reform, and planning.

B. Each subcommittee might consist of 5-7 member countries, each country to be represented by its most highly qualified expert on the subject matter being considered by that subcommittee. Each other country represented on the IA-ECOSOC could send an observer to the meetings of each subcommittee, and the observers would be allowed to participate in the discussions of the meetings, though not authorized to vote.

C. Each subcommittee would meet regularly every three months to:

1. Review the quarterly and annual progress reports to be prepared by the Secretariat of the Pan American Union on the progress achieved on the subject in question in Latin America in general and in each Latin American country in particular.

2. Write a quarterly and an annual subcommittee report evaluating the rate of progress in the area concerned. The reports could be on a functional basis, such as the rate of title clearance for agricultural land in all of Latin America. The reports would, as appropriate, refer to progress by country, as for example by extending special commendation to a specific country for the enactment and implementation of agrarian and fiscal reform.

3. Submit quarterly and annual recommendations for steps to be taken to improve the rate of progress. These reports also could be written in terms of function, as by recommending specific steps to be taken to increase the number of cadastral surveys in Latin America. The reports also could recommend specific steps to increase the rate of progress in each country.

D. Each subcommittee could, within limitations, establish its own rules of procedure. Each could determine whether to meet regularly in just one city or to meet in different cities each time. Each could decide whether to have a permanent chairman or rotating chairmanship. Each could determine the number of days and the specific dates for each meeting, provided that the last meeting prior to the annual IA-ECOSOC meeting should be held on dates which would permit the submission of an annual report by each subcommittee to the separate country representatives of the IA-ECOSOC within a period of no less than 2 months prior to the scheduled meeting of the IA-ECOSOC.

(While I am biased against both committees and meetings, I believe they could be useful in this instance for the purpose of getting each country directly involved in the affairs of each of the other countries within the Alliance. I believe this mechanism would be much preferable to reliance upon the staffs of any permanent institutions, whether the OAS, ECLA, or the IDB. I should say also that while I do not expect the multinational committee mechanism to show quick and useful results, I cannot envisage any other mechanism which is as likely to be fruitful.)

II. A “super committee” should be set up for the purpose of inducing each of the various Latin American countries to exert greater effort in achieving the objectives of the Alliance. Ex-President Kubitschek of Brazil has already taken some initiative in this regard. Ex-President Lleras Camargo of Colombia may also be willing to participate in this effort. It has been suggested that this sort of super committee might report to the Council of the OAS in a purely advisory capacity. Alternatively, it might be given general, non-specific, responsibility for consulting with the separate Latin American governments and for formulating suggestions which might be presented at the annual meetings of the IA-ECOSOC.

Obviously, I have no clear idea as to what such a group might in fact do. It seems clear to me that these outstanding statesmen could not be expected to concern themselves with technical matters, nor should they be encouraged to do so. However, two or three men such as Kubitschek and Lleras Camargo might be able to do much, by virtue of their public stature, to help create or to strengthen the mystique of the Alliance for Progress through some sort of informal and non-defined association with the Alliance. On the other hand, care must be taken to avoid giving them too much responsibility, lest they make public recommendations conflicting with those emanating from the 9 wisemen or the IA-ECOSOC. I have no doubt that these men could be useful for promoting the Alliance, but very careful understandings should be reached with them as to the limitations of their responsibilities, before they are given an important public role.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 371.8/8-1362. Confidential. Drafted by May. Also sent to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of AID, Graham Martin, and the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, John Leddy. A copy was sent to William Turnage, Director of the Office of Inter-American Regional Economic Cooperation.