Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, General: Economic and Political Matters, Volume I, Part 2

398.2395/4–1353

Memorandum by the Deputy Director of the Office of International Materials Policy (Armstrong) to George H. Alexander of the Agriculture Products Staff

confidential

Washington, April 13, 1953.

• Subject:
• Summary of Results of Interdepartmental Meeting on Rubber Position for Copenhagen

The positions of the various agencies, as expressed at the interdepartmental meeting held on April 8, were as follows:

1. ODM expressed no specific objection to the proposed position,¹ but suggested some rewording to avoid mentioning Indonesian and British Colonial delegations by name.

2. Defense presented a letter which said that we should seek to obtain commitments for an embargo or severe curtailment of rubber shipments to the Bloc in exchange for going along with a negotiating conference.² When questioned, the Defense representative said that there was no objection on the part of Defense to the proposed position paper and that the suggestions for obtaining agreement obviously could not be handled in an open meeting, but would have to be taken up on the side with the rubber producing countries. When further questioned, the Defense representative said that this negotiation with the rubber producing countries would be most suitable if there were going to be a negotiating conference and if the United States proposed to take a fairly positive position at that conference. It was agreed that the United States Delegate could make it clear privately at Copenhagen that in all probability the United States would want such commitments from producers if it were subsequently to entertain seriously the idea of developing a buffer stock agreement.

3. RFC presented a letter³ in which no objection to the proposed position paper was registered, and RFC oral comments were along the line of concurrence with the paper.

4. The Tariff Commission representative stated that the Tariff Commission decided that it could not take any position on the proposal.

5. The MSA representative said that his agency felt that the desirability and necessity of a rubber agreement had not been demonstrated, that it would be better if the United States could avoid taking any position at Copenhagen, and that it was hoped that action on the buffer stock could be delayed until the problem withered. The MSA representative agreed, however, that there was no objection on the part of his agency to the proposed position paper.

6. The Department of Agriculture said they had no objection to the position paper, that they are interested in commodity agreements, that they believe the United States should go along with a rubber agreement if there is a clear case for it, and that there is not much danger of an undesirable agreement.

7. The Commerce Department representatives said that Commerce was generally opposed to a buffer stock agreement, that it thought further negotiation of one would be misleading, and that the rubber industry was in a position to take care of the situation and prevent low prices. The OIT man said that it was unrealistic to fail to offer alternatives.

The Commerce Department subsequently wrote a letter to the Department, on April 9, indicating its position.⁴ In the Industry Panel meeting on April 9, I outlined the position set forth in our paper, indicated that it had been approved by the Secretary, and stated that one agency of the Government had not yet approved it.

1. This is presumably a reference to an early draft of the position paper transmitted to Armstrong on May 8, 1953, to serve as a guide for his negotiations at the Tenth International Rubber Study Group meeting in Copenhagen. The position paper, which contained substantially the same lines of thought as presented in Assistant Secretary Linder’s memorandum to Secretary Dulles, supra, is in file 398.2395 CO/5–853.
2. The letter under reference, dated Apr. 1, 1953, from Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank C. Nash to Assistant Secretary Linder, is in file 398.2395 CO/4–153.
3. Not found in Department of State files.
4. The letter of Apr. 9 has not been found in Department of State files. In a meeting, however, between several officers of the Department of State and the Assistant Secretary of Commerce, Samuel W. Anderson, on Apr. 28, 1953, the Department of Commerce yielded to the Department’s position. (Memorandum of conversation, Apr. 28, 1953, 398.2395/4–2853) As indicated in footnote 1 above, instructions were issued to the U.S. Delegate to the Copenhagen meeting on May 8. The decision was taken during that meeting, which convened on May 11, to call a special meeting of the Management Committee of the International Rubber Study Group in London in October to perfect a draft rubber buffer stock agreement. Reports relating to the Copenhagen meeting are in file 398.2395/6–553. For a report on the October Management Committee meeting in London, see telegram 1668 from London, Oct. 17, 1953, p. 1027.