Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XXIV, Africa

110. Action Memorandum From the Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs (Williams) to Secretary of State Rusk¹

Washington, January 15, 1965.

SUBJECT

• Military Assistance for Morocco

Discussion:

The rapid build-up in military materiel in Algeria as the result of Soviet aid will, according to US intelligence estimates, place Morocco at a clear military disadvantage in terms of hardware, organization and training in both air and ground within six months to a year. Morocco is understandably apprehensive regarding its ability in the future to deter aggression and defend its territory.

The Moroccans have presented the French and ourselves with requests for military assistance and Foreign Minister Benhima will understandably pursue the matter when he sees you January 18.

The French have responded with a five-year program involving ground force equipment and propeller-driven support aircraft (Tab A).² Although severely hampered in our response by the shortage of MAP funds, we are considering a program to supplement the French program through providing surplus equipment either by gift or by sale for local currency. We are now determining whether our program will in any way conflict with that of the French (Tab B).

The principal problem lies in meeting Morocco’s concern over the Algerian air force which now includes MIG-21’s and IL–18 bombers. The French have said they are not interested in helping Morocco in this field, a position that we are attempting to verify (Tab B). A ground to air missile defense would be both expensive and elaborate in terms of installations and training. (Nike installation, for example, would cost $13–15 million per battalion of 36.)

The least expensive approach lies in providing more advanced aircraft equipped for air defense. Depending on the aircraft chosen, this could mean an outlay of between $5 and $15 million over a period of years. A list of the possible aircraft now under consideration, their cost, and their characteristics is attached at Tab C.³ In view of the growing disadvantage vis-a-vis Algeria, Morocco will undoubtedly press for an early delivery.

To provide such an early adequate response to the Moroccans would require additional MAP funds beginning in FY-1965 or FY-1966 and probably over the next two or three subsequent years. The Moroccan MAP program which has totalled $24.9 million over the past five years is now phasing out; the current FY 1965 figure is $800,000, largely for training and spare parts. Additional funds for aircraft are not now available and are not included in the transfer of surplus AID funds to DOD now planned for this fiscal year. A possible resolution would be for DOD to use the authority in the Foreign Assistance Act to provide aircraft from its inventories in this fiscal year; this would require reimbursement from MAP in subsequent fiscal years.

Helping Morocco under present circumstances poses other problems as well. Morocco is currently experiencing serious financial difficulties and the addition of sophisticated military aircraft will place greater burdens on its budget. A decision on the type and phasing of an air defense program must take into account the financial implications for Morocco as well as the direct effect upon its economic development efforts. Morocco, over the longer term, suffers from problems of administrative disorganization and growing political restiveness. A military deterrent will be of little value without improvement in its internal political and economic health. Conspicuous Western assistance to Morocco runs a risk of additional polarization in North Africa.

Nevertheless, it is important to the United States that Morocco maintain its basically pro-Western orientation. Morocco has been particularly helpful to the US in recent UN and African issues, regarding the Congo. How Morocco obtains a military deterrent to Algerian strength will be a major factor in determining how Morocco goes politically.

The United States is today faced with three alternatives:

1. It can provide an assurance to Morocco that, if Morocco is clearly threatened with aggression by air from Algeria, the United States will send forces to defend the Kingdom. This would have the advantage (if accepted) of not involving us in a further MAP program; it would have the disadvantages of directly involving US forces, possibly before actual fighting had begun, in North Africa.

2. The United States can indicate it is not in a position to provide more advanced aircraft and encourage Morocco to look elsewhere. King Hassan, who already has MIG 17 aircraft and is scheduled to visit Moscow in May, would almost certainly seek additional parts for his present MIG’s and additional aircraft from the Soviet Union and would undoubtedly be required to make political concessions to the USSR. Such action on his part, however, would avoid a military polarization in North Africa.

3. The United States could provide a minimum program of additional jet aircraft phased over three to four years and on condition that, because of shortage of support resources, Morocco retire its MIG squadron. To do this would require extraordinary Executive Branch measures to obtain additional funds.

Recommendation:

On balance we favor the third alternative. We recommend that you:

1. Authorize AF to examine with AID and DOD (a) the most appropriate type and number of aircraft to provide Morocco, taking into account Morocco’s ability to operate and maintain, together with the impact of the program on the GOM’s budgetary situation in relation to overall US objectives in Morocco and (b) the possible source and timing of funding for the program determined to be most appropriate in the light of US world wide priorities and requirements.⁴

2. Inform Benhima although the U.S. has still under consideration the possibility of ground force equipment from surplus and may be able to help on some items, the most appropriate area for a U.S. contribution to Moroccan military needs appears to be that of air defense. Morocco has, of course, other sources of ground force equipment. Our response on air defense must necessarily be limited by stringent fund restrictions, worldwide U.S. military requirements, the impact of alternative air defense possibilities on Morocco’s budgetary situation, and the GOM’s capability to operate and maintain such alternative programs. We would hope to be in further touch with the Government of Morocco as soon as our analysis of the problem is completed.⁵

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, DEF 19 US–MOR. Secret. Drafted by Newsom and sent through Bell and Harriman. Concurred in by Lang (DOD), Kleine (AID), Barbour (WE), and Moses (G/PM).
2. Tabs A and B were not attached. Tab A was telegram 3774 from Paris; Tab B was telegram 3691 to Paris.
3. Tab C was attached but is not printed.
4. Secretary Rusk initialed his approval of this recommendation on January 19. On January 26, Secretary of Defense McNamara approved an $11 million grant-credit arrangement ($5 million grant and $6 million credit) recommended by the Department of State to help Morocco develop a deterrent to the Algerian air threat by acquiring a squadron of 12 F–5s. (Memorandum from McNaughton to McNamara; Washington National Records Center, RG 330, OASD/ISA Files: FRC 70 A 3717, 091.3 Morocco)
5. Secretary Rusk initialed his approval of this recommendation on January 19.