1st Session CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN AREA (CUBA, HAITI, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, PANAMA, COSTA RICA, NICARAGUA, HONDURAS, EL SALVADOR, GUATEMALA, AND MEXICO) REPORT ON UNITED STATES FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PREPARED AT THE REQUEST OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE FORMER MUTUAL SECURITY AGENCY CHIEF IN PORTUGAL (Pursuant to S. Res. 285, 84th Cong., and S. Res. 35, 85th Cong.) Survey No. 9 88984 MARCH 1957 Printed for the use of the Special Committee To Study the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1957 14 SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE FOREIGN AID PROGRAM (Created pursuant to S. Res. 285, 84th Cong., 2d Sess., and S. Res. 35, 85th Cong., 1st Sess.) MEMBERS FROM THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE FOREIGN PREFACE By Theodore Francis Green, Chairman, Special Committee to Study the Foreign Aid Program The Special Committee to Study the Foreign Aid Program was created under the authority of Senate Resolution 285, agreed to July 11, 1956. The committee is composed of all members of the Committee on Foreign Relations and the chairman and ranking minority member of the Senate Committee on Appropriations and the Senate Committee on Armed Services. Pursuant to the terms of the resolution, the special committee was instructed to make exhaustive studies of the extent to which foreign assistance In the conduct of its study the committee was also instructed to make full use *** of the experience, knowledge, and advice of private organizations, schools, institutions, and individuals. It was authorized to enter contracts for this purpose, and not to exceed $300,000 was made available to meet the expenses of the committee. Since the special committee was instructed to transmit the results of its study to the Senate not later than January 31, 1957,1 and in view of the shortness of time available for its work, a small executive committee was constituted to supervise the detailed research work for the full committee. The executive committee upon instructions from the full committee outlined a number of research projects to be undertaken by private institutions in the United States. In order to supplement those research projects, the executive committee made arrangements with ten individuals to conduct "on-thespot" surveys of foreign aid programs in different regions of the world. The individuals concerned were asked to submit a report dealing with-- the fundamental aims of American foreign policy in the area 1 By Senate Resolution 35, adopted by the Senate on January 30, 1957, the time for reporting by the special committee was extended to June 30, 1957, and $75,000 of the $82,000 left over from the original fund was made available for the work of the committee. Listed below are the regions of the world which were covered by the "on-the-spot" surveys and the individuals who undertook the assignments: 1. Former Ambassador Norman Armour: Countries-Greece, Turkey, and Iran. 2. Mr. Hamilton Fish Armstrong, editor of Foreign Affairs: Countries-Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan. 3. Former Ambassador David K. E. Bruce: Countries-Peru, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil. 4. Former Ambassador Jefferson Caffery: Countries-Portugal, 5. Dr. John A. Hannah, president, Michigan State University: many. 7. Mr. Clement Johnston, chairman of the board of the United 10. Mr. Allan B. Kline, former president, American Farm Bureau Federation: Country-Yugoslavia. This report, the ninth of the on-the-spot survey reports to be submitted to the special committee, was prepared by Mr. James Minotto, former MSA Chief in Portugal, who studied the foreign aid programs in Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Mexico. I anticipate that the special committee may wish to make this report the subject of a public hearing. In that way it will be possible for committee members to test the soundness of the conclusions and recommendations of the report. This is a report to the Special Committee to Study the Foreign Aid Program, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the committee or of any of its members. |