Foreign Relations of the United States, 1981–1988, Volume XXXVIII, International Economic Development; International Debt; Foreign Assistance

265. Memorandum From Secretary of State Haig to the Counselor to the President (Meese)¹

Washington, August 15, 1981

SUBJECT

• FY 1982 Security and Development Assistance Legislation

With passage of the critical domestic economic legislation, it is imperative that we now turn our attention to enactment of the FY 1982 security and development assistance authorization and appropriations bills and raise these to the top of the White House legislative agenda.

The Administration has constructed an ambitious international security policy to sustain our leadership role and fortify the defense of our national interests. The credibility and success of this policy depend mainly on significant improvements in our defense posture and a parallel strengthening of allied and friendly forces. These two major and complementary objectives are of the highest priority; they require increased budgetary levels.

We are, however, confronted by the prospect of failure. Thus far, Congress has not enacted authorization and appropriations legislation for the FY 1982 foreign assistance program. For the third consecutive year the program is threatened with a continuing resolution which would provide substantially less than we need. The security assistance shortfall could be as much as $1.5 billion below the $6.8 billion program authority request.

Key Democrats including HFAC Chairman Zablocki are willing to approve most aspects of the program, but are unwilling to take the lead, as in previous years, without assurances of strong Republican support. Many Republican House members, however, do not yet believe that the White House is interested in the legislation and have not been willing to support it. This perception reinforces a traditional House antipathy toward foreign assistance.

If we cannot get foreign assistance bills this year, Israel will be about the only security assistance country program to survive in reasonable shape. Egypt, Turkey, Sudan, Kenya, Portugal, El Salvador, and Thailand among others, plus our initiatives for Military Assistance and Economic Support special requirements funds to meet unanticipated needs, will suffer irreparable damage. Key development assistance programs such as those in Africa and Central America will be reduced. A dangerous precedent would also be set for FY 1983 for which we are planning major augmentations.

In sum, if the resources necessary to carry out this Administration’s foreign policy are to be available in FY 82, the Congress, particularly Republican members, must understand that the White House regards urgent passage of this program to be critical to its foreign policy objectives. Successful enactment will require the full resources of the White House staff. I strongly urge that you place foreign assistance legislation as one of the two or three highest congressional priorities of the Administration.²

1. Source: Reagan Library, Executive Secretariat, NSC Subject File, [Security Assistance] Foreign Aid (May 1981–August 1981). Confidential.
2. Haig wrote in the bottom margin of the memorandum: “Ed—I cannot overemphasize how critical this issue is becoming. There will be no hope of carrying the day unless the Pres. and the senior W.H. staff get behind this issue now. Thanks, Al.”