A/MS files, lot 54 D 291, “Relationship with FOA”
The Director of Foreign Operations (Stassen) to the Secretary of State
Dear Foster: Thank you for your thoughtful letter of September 28.1 I am pleased that it is your view that our proposed organization adheres to the plans of the President’s reorganization message and the Rockefeller Committee Report, and should facilitate close and effective working relationships at all levels between our agencies and contribute to carrying out successfully this Government’s foreign policy.
With respect to the specific question you raise on TCA field staffs, may I hasten to advise you that the instructions to change all missions to United States Operations Missions have already gone forward, as I had not heard of any difference on this since I had forwarded the chart to you on August 25. May I comment further that I do consider it quite essential for efficient administration for all missions to take on certain new characteristics under President Eisenhower’s Administration and for all missions to be closely coordinated under the country team leadership of the Ambassador.
In the Far East area, for example, we have established the Regional Directorship under Dr. Raymond Moyer, who is extremely competent and experienced, and whose appointment I checked with Assistant Secretary Robertson before concluding. The missions in Indonesia and Burma have been TCA missions. The missions in Thailand, Indo-China and the Philippines have been MSA missions. Under our reorganization, they will all become United States Operations Missions, subject, of course, to the question of the future Burma situation.
Likewise, in the Near East-Africa area, the missions in Greece and Turkey are MSA missions, and the type of coordinated economic and technical assistance program which will be carried on in Iran and Egypt, for example, can best be handled by a similar type mission.
Throughout the world, there is not a clear-cut division, nor can there logically be one between technical assistance and economic assistance. Our basic approach is that we are conducting a United States program overseas, that our objectives are world-wide, that they are consistent, and that they spring from the foreign policy leadership of the Secretary of State and are under the direction of the President.
[Page 656]I am entirely in agreement that either the Mission Chiefs or the Deputy Mission Chiefs should also serve as the chief economic officers of the Ambassadors, and we have been moving steadily in this direction, working with the Assistant Secretaries concerned. Spain is currently being set up on this basis.
With regard to Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands and Portugal, we are contemplating very small missions closely integrated with the Embassies. In these NATO countries, with the extensive offshore procurement, counterpart, raw materials, overseas territories, productivity projects, and surplus food problems, it seems quite clear to me that a continuation of a small mission with the country team approach is preferable to any type of special agreement for an expanded embassy financed by FOA funds. We have liquidated the Mission in Iceland and will further review toward the end of this current fiscal year the activities and programs and the best method of administration in the other countries.
I will be pleased to discuss any of these problems with you further, and in the meantime my staff and its regional officers will continue to cooperate closely with yours in the specific working problems.
Sincerely yours,