363. Letter From President Reagan to Senator Pete V. Domenici1
I am writing to underscore Secretary Shultz’s recent statements on the grave implications of Congressional budget actions in the International Affairs (150) function.2 As conferees begin to work on a final budget resolution for FY 1987, I hope you will take into account my concern that the funding levels under consideration risk jeopardizing all the progress we have made in the past five years. Today, we have a strong, effective foreign policy, due in large measure to the increased resources we have devoted—with bipartisan Congressional support—to international affairs. We must not reverse this situation through unwise budgetary action.
The request for the International Affairs function represents less than 2.3 percent of the entire federal budget. Out of this small fraction, we fund not only our entire foreign assistance program and the State Department’s operations, but also numerous smaller programs dealing with the conduct of foreign affairs and international communications and cultural exchanges. For this relatively small share of the budget, we receive enormous dividends, chief among which is a renewed position of influence and respect internationally.
Yet, the Congress has taken this small fraction and cut it by as much as twenty-five percent. Moreover, as Secretary Shultz has pointed out, after funding our highest priority commitments to Israel and Egypt, the base rights countries, Pakistan, and Central America, and after allowing for the Congress’ addition of over a billion dollars for the Export-Import Bank, the shortfall in the bulk of our foreign affairs programs is more on the order of fifty percent.
Pete, the implications of these reductions are severe. Our efforts in the fragile Caribbean countries of Haiti, Jamaica and Grenada would be undercut. Aid to the Andean countries could not continue, and our efforts to halt the production and illegal export of narcotics from this region would be undermined. Key security assistance programs with vital strategic partners such as Korea and Thailand would probably have to be terminated. Successful humanitarian assistance programs [Page 891] throughout Sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia could not be funded. We would be unable to continue providing adequate assistance to moderate Arab states such as Tunisia, Morocco, Jordan and Oman, thus putting at risk our continuing efforts toward a Middle East peace. That part of our assistance which goes through the international financial and development institutions would also be severely circumscribed, calling into question our reliability in meeting commitments in multilateral fora.
The problem is not limited to foreign aid alone. In the wake of increasing threats to our diplomats living and working abroad, I have requested a major Embassy security enhancement initiative. We must be able to protect American lives and property abroad against terrorist activity directed at the United States.
Meanwhile, the ongoing operations of the State Department, USIA and the Board for International Broadcasting must also be funded. Reductions of the kind being discussed could result in substantial reductions in our diplomatic presence overseas which would give the impression of a United States in retreat. This is hardly the sort of posture we should be adopting in the wake of the foreign policy successes we have achieved over the past few years.
Such cutbacks in foreign affairs programs would send a signal to the world that we are retrenching just as an era of new opportunity is dawning. It would be tragic if we were to send such a signal.
In your deliberations on the budget, I ask that you bear in mind the consequences of your decisions for the policies which we have worked so hard together to implement. There must be no further cuts; to the extent possible, I ask you to explore means to reverse or at least minimize the reductions which you have already made. We must continue to pay the relatively small cost of a vital, active foreign policy which tells the world that we stand for peace, freedom and security.
Sincerely,
- Source: Reagan Library, Stephen Farrar Files, 1985–1986 File, Subject File, Foreign Aid—Budget 06/4/1986; NLR–177–1–23–1–8. No classification marking. An identical letter was sent to Congressman William H. Gray. (Ibid.)↩
- A reference to press briefings and public statements made by Shultz criticizing the Congress for underfunding international affairs programs. For a summary of this effort, see Document 364.↩