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

50. Memorandum From the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Allen) to the Counselor to the President (Meese), the White House Chief of Staff (Baker), and the White House Deputy Chief of Staff (Deaver)¹

Washington, September 28, 1981

SUBJECT

• Cancun Dateline: Three Weeks to Go

In a recent editorial in the New York Times, William Safire suggested that the President “may be backing into a buzz saw” at Cancun.² Is there evidence to support this view?

At the Foreign Ministers Preparatory Meeting for the Cancun Summit in early August, there was a tone of moderation in the attitudes of the developing countries and a clear split in their ranks on the matter of forcing a decision on GNs at Cancun. Since then, two North-South conferences have been held—the U.N. Conference on New and Renewable Energy Sources in Nairobi, Kenya, in August and the Conference on Least Less Developed Countries in Paris in September. Reports from these meetings suggest that the LDCs continue to exercise some restraint compared to their normal behavior in such conferences.³ On the one hand, this may imply a certain resignation on their part that the industrial countries, particularly the U.S. will not be more forthcoming in the dialogue. Present budget circumstances and known U.S. skepticism about GNs seem to preclude it. On the other hand, it may also reflect expectations that the U.S. attitude is softening and that progress toward GNs and consideration of the issues on the LDC agenda can be best achieved if the U.S. is given more time to recognize its isolation and alter its attitudes.

Incomplete reports from the U.N. indicate that Secretary Haig’s speech was generally well received.⁴ The fact that the speech was devoted almost entirely to development was considered to be significant. Many countries came forward after the speech to shake the Secretary’s hand (this is said to be somewhat unusual in these circumstances). At the same time, reports also indicated some puzzlement and continuing concern about the direction of U.S. policy, especially concerning participation in GNs.

Despite the indications of continuing moderation, there are also some gathering clouds that indicate an approaching storm (or “buzz saw” to use Safire’s metaphor). The principal developments here include:

— Algeria becomes the new spokesman for the G–77 in October, replacing Venezuela which exercised an important moderating role at both the Nairobi and Paris conferences. Algeria, it will be recalled, is the principal advocate of reaching a decision on GNs at Cancun;

— the African countries, led by Nigeria, and including the Ivory Coast, have met and agreed to push commodity agreements as a central issue at Cancun;

— despite rejection of the idea at the Foreign Minister’s meeting, Mexico initiated a letter to all participants seeking to identify more detailed topics each head of government would address, undoubtedly in the hope of developing a more detailed agenda;⁵

— reports suggest that Saudi Arabia will support Algeria on the GNs issue as a cheap way of offsetting its current isolation in OPEC;

— Nigeria continues to be strongly opposed to U.S. policies in southern Africa and may find Cancun an attractive occasion to align with the hardliners (Algeria) in order to impress the U.S. with African and more broadly LDC dissatisfaction with U.S. policies;

— reports suggest that India and France are collaborating to revive and push the idea of a World Bank energy affiliate at Cancun.

Perhaps the most disturbing news comes from the activities of U.S. allies. The Germans are divided, with Genscher in the Foreign Ministry pressing GNs, Brandt proposing in a letter to the President a massive program of energy and infrastructure assistance to the developing countries, and Schmidt remaining skeptical but increasingly powerless to restrain his coalition partners. Austria, although a co-chairman of the meeting, is showing little heart for the contest and is joining the effort to secure a specific outcome from Cancun, either a launching of GNs or a consensus on the World Bank energy affiliate. Kreisky is said to favor the GNs even if they have no prospect of productive achievement. He feels it is always better for nations to talk and thereby avoid the rash acts of countries that feel excluded.

France may be the most troublesome of all the allies. Five recent developments indicate potential trouble from Paris:

— Mitterrand’s speech in the LLDC Conference struck all the wrong emphases from the U.S. point-of-view—more aid, massive program to standardize commodity prices for LDC products, renewed support for the energy affiliate, emphatic support for GNs;

— in mid September, Cheyssen, the French Foreign Minister, said that France will not simply state its views at Cancun but will act in concert with other nations to press very hard for GNs and the creation of a World Bank energy affiliate. He noted parenthetically that the other nations include Sweden, India and Mexico;

— recent reports from reliable sources suggest that France is preparing a Memo of Understanding between developed and developing countries to be tabled at Cancun. This is precisely the kind of document (communique, resolution) that would turn Cancun into a typical UN slug fest over meaningless slogans.

— Mitterrand is said to be asking Mexico and Austria if he could appear together with Lopez Portillo and Kreisky at the concluding press conference of the Summit.

— Cheyssen’s speech at the UN reiterated with emphasis all of the themes of French policies on Third World relations that conflict with U.S. interests.

The clouds gathering around Cancun are sufficiently disturbing to press the U.S. into action. Since the best defense is a good offense, it becomes even more important for the President to seize the initiative and to deliver a hard hitting and credible speech before Cancun.⁶ The speech should be preceded by intensive U.S. lobbying in selected capitals (among LDCs, India, Nigeria, Yugoslavia, Venezuela and Brazil should receive priority), including possible communications (letters, phone calls) by the President. The speech itself will be more effective the closer into Cancun it is delivered. It will capture the headlines and press reporting for the several days prior to Cancun, and it will complicate and perhaps derail the strategy of any other group of countries that may seek to focus Cancun on issues such as GNs and the World Bank energy affiliate. If the President’s program is forthcoming enough, our issues may even go so far as to displace other issues at Cancun.

Attached to this paper is a preliminary outline of the President’s speech drawn together by Dick Darman from fragments developed by the agencies and the NSC.⁷ The outline indicates the potential of a major Presidential policy address on this subject. The policy issues related to Cancun are scheduled to be discussed at the Cabinet level next week and reviewed as a whole by the NSC on October 5.⁸ As policy pieces fall in place, the outline can be developed and fleshed out as a speech draft for the President.

1. Source: Reagan Library, Executive Secretariat, NSC Trip File, President Reagan’s Participation in the International Meeting on Cooperation and Development Cancun, Mexico 10/21/1981–10/23/1981 Plenary Sessions: Multilateral Economic Issues—Mr. Allen (Binder); NLR–755–2–44–2–1. Secret. A handwritten note under the memorandum reads: “9/28/81 sent JCP,” indicating that copies were sent to Darman, Fuller, Anderson, and Gergen.
2. See William Safire, “Reagan Out of Town,” New York Times, September 20, 1981.
3. In telegram 18591 from Nairobi, August 24, the Embassy reported on the conclusions of the UN Conference on New and Renewable Sources of Energy. (Department of State, Central Foreign Policy File, Electronic Telegrams, D810395–0699) In telegram 27579 from Paris, September 16, the Embassy reported on the UN Conference on Least Developed Countries. (Department of State, Central Foreign Policy File, Electronic Telegrams, D810436–0402)
4. See footnote 2, Document 47.
5. See footnote 8, Document 39.
6. See Document 67.
7. The undated “Outline of President’s Speech on Development” is attached but not printed.
8. According to the President’s Daily Diary, Reagan attended a meeting in the Cabinet Room to discuss the approach to the Cancun Summit on October 5 from 3:19 until 4:34 p.m. (Reagan Library) Minutes of this meeting were not found.