Conversation 567-009

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Good morning.

Good morning, sir.

Well, your mind is still roused?

You think I'm worried?

I bet you have a big deal to do with me, wouldn't I?

I don't know.

It's worth it.

I'll be back in a few minutes.

All right, gentlemen, let's go right out of the way, please.

All right.

Second shift here.

Second shift.

If you're busy, I said we can take you to work.

There you go.

We can take you to work.

Thank you very much.

And before you speak, I would like to make your message in the 19th, 17th of August, which gave me tremendous courage to continue this fight and the alliance and your decision to continue your existence in your government.

And of course, your kindness.

Today, I want to talk to you on two specific things.

One, the long-term relations that I see them now, and second, the immediate problems.

I think that I start by the second part, because I think it's more urgent.

Sure.

We have measures that we go to today that are really very, very long-term.

In my opinion, they're very positive about COVID.

And it is demonstrated now in the world context that you were right in the process.

Because J.M.

is now a minister of the United States.

He's 6.5%.

So Germany and the rest, therefore, .

And he is, my opinion, I like to convey that to the meeting of ministers

that the equilibrium and the healthy economy of the United States is extremely important for the American development.

Therefore, this part is definitely my personal position.

The two aspects that this project has to do, one, is to test that there are some countries, more so than others, for instance, Mexico, Argentina, and some others.

of course the 10% reduction on foreign aid if it affects Latin America or the advance, because Congress didn't accept your proposals, your message, and not accepting your proposals, they cut the aid program severely.

And this cut already had 10%, still more.

The first part, it's, I think it's,

In Latin America, they were, I might say, stressed and in some cases, because they have done all their best to continue the policy that you, Mr. President, suggested last year.

of trade, not aid, and for the reasons that I understand and I hear and I know what is happening to Europe and this country.

But it's not so easy, you know?

But for instance, your sector states have mentioned in the Costa Rica, I'm going to propose, as soon as I come back, the provincial treatment as the Europeans have done.

And the conversations with the ministers have been not so efficient.

to trade as they had hoped.

So, I see here two different elements.

One is the real facts which are not so great.

Second, there is an element of injustice in the measures we have laid for Latin America, because Latin America is the only country that has had no, any damage to the boundaries of the U.S. trade.

And second,

It's the only continent that carries their reserves in dollars.

Therefore, it is difficult for them to accept that they should be punished in a certain way.

So, this is the immediate part.

I think that the political risk

both for mundane or non-families, that we may think more deeply and more in live data.

It is far more crazy to present that the benefits of professional development we have from this.

I understand.

First of all, you have .

At the end, these are discriminatory in the case for the poorer countries and for the poorer people.

People who are more distressed in Argentina, in Mexico, in all the countries that I've spoken to, is those people who have small factories.

They have created and bought equipment here, and now they don't know where to send it.

which is exactly the fact that your country is going to buy less or more of this 10% of their people.

Therefore, the element of personal opinion is quite serious.

So, it seems to me, I'm going to propose that we ask the Spiderman Commission

that after you have the possibilities of solving the problem, I would like to be able to tell them that I know that you are aware of the damage that these measures might have, that I think that anywhere you seek any type of possibilities to alleviate any harm that might have occurred to those who were killed,

I know, which is your attitude, very positive, Matthew.

Otherwise, you'd be talking to your doctor.

So I think that is, I think the political risk of being extremely the application of these measures that aren't just for Latin America, but for the rest of the nation, there's not any to correct this under the regulations with the dollar.

I'm aware of the case of Venezuela.

I think I know, I don't know.

In general, all of them are much below.

Therefore, the basic point of what we are talking is changing government from buying gold.

It's no problem.

It's because we're pressuring people to charge 10% because they know that they have been already paid cut from your proposal to the countries.

And they weren't aware of that.

If you've got 10% more, it's so meaningful to the United States economies that we've heard that.

This is the first part.

My hope is that in an act that will tell why this came to be so important, and it is an occasion that I would suggest you feel it convenient to utilize this occasion for this.

We are going to, today, they have in the Latin Americas, in Buenos Aires, precisely stolen the measures that the United States has imposed.

I don't know if it's time to come out.

The finance minister is very busy.

Some of the finance ministers are not there.

It was conveyed of all four by Argentina.

They're meeting today.

I spoke by phone yesterday night.

He invited me to go.

Of course, I was late because he didn't see her.

But apparently, in three different countries, Mexico, Puerto Rico at night,

Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil, all three said not this way to do in Panama, that we know each other in the United States.

Now, from there we go to Panama next Tuesday.

We have three days of TENICA.

You go to Panama Tuesday?

Yes.

You will not be back here.

I go to Panama Tuesday, and on Tuesday we start with the TENICA group.

And then, the ministers will be asked, all of them, when we reach Alabama, on the 13th of the start, who will be there?

Yes, who will be there?

Well, that being said, Walker, Matt Samuels will be second.

Oh, I agree.

I believe there'll be an assistant secretary level.

I believe Walker.

Eddie?

Yeah.

Oh, yeah, Eddie, of course.

Just after that, the same group of ministers talked about that to the caucus, the Latin American caucus, for preparing the International Monetary Fund meeting.

And then they come to Washington at the end of the month.

So this is a conversation that I suppose that if you can, Mr. President, I know it is difficult and I don't pretend to tell you that.

I understand that the measures very well that they are taking, but it is a moment

perhaps would give some hope to Latin America about these two or three elements.

First, that you are aware that some of these issues might harm, and it is not your purpose because you are aware that it wasn't your fault for Latin America.

Second, that you are going to study the immediate future, that you have said that these measures are permissioned, that you might be interested in trying to seek systems

of avoiding harm to Latin America because you insist in giving Latin America a special treatment that you have.

I think it's a good moment to do that.

If you think it's convenient for your policy, and if it would be a political gesture, it should be extremely convenient.

Now, I feel that there are some positive elements in what I see in Latin America changing dramatically.

That's very true.

Well, for instance, let me mention a few cases.

The new government of Mexico State, right, Gerardo?

Yeah.

The new political government of Warsaw.

Yeah.

The three last elections of China, one from the university, was won by a group which are not the Marxists.

One, the election in Barbados, over there, was won by one who is not the Marxists.

And thirdly,

As far as I know, in the labor unions of one of the coal companies, Turkey Kamata, which is already nationalized, and under the list, the election of people of the labor union was won by different groups, which are not the Marxist groups.

Therefore, I think that even Peru is taking a route to more calcium than they were before they were sold.

I suppose that there

to think that it's true, including certain parts of this.

So I hope, I would hope that a gesture, a positive gesture by your president, in the way you think it would permit you to do it, so you would realize that these four meetings are being held at present.

It would permit you to have a good opportunity for doing it again in force.

In a way, you should think of me for Latin America.

And if you'll permit me, I talk to you as a friend, as you know, much more than an opposite of the American officer.

I'm just telling you what I did, because my work here this year has been precisely to improve the experience of many more countries in Latin America.

It is that you should utilize these observations to show, again, your interest for Latin America.

It is not necessarily that you precisely

I am aware that this virus, I heard it, and being aware of that, and being aware that it has contributed in proportion to the welfare balance of patients and the goal that we've been researching all these years.

I would like to see the solutions that might come as soon as we can, slowly, or just in the back, or in front of where everything already is.

This is practically already short-run.

I must tell you this, but I have the feeling that Latin America is really distressed and in conflict with these measures, because they don't know what's going to happen to them.

But it really is.

How much of that part is real?

Nobody knows until these events come.

But part is also the lack of saying, well, President Nixon told us that we're going to trade and now nothing is made.

I think that it's an important moment for you, Mr. President, to regain political posture, political height in Latin America, which is very, very important.

Now, in the long run, I think that what you have said in 2017 and your declarations to the Congress are sufficiently important to come to them, to back to them, to demonstrate that you will continue your special relationship with that dynamic that is of your own spontaneous.

You are being, of course, complicated in the war situation, in your own internal situation,

I think that doesn't make me understand it.

And perhaps it would be convenient for the near future, after all these meetings take place, to have a new analysis of how we would prospect the next 10 years of relations between your country and Latin America.

Because Latin America is changing very fast, and I would like to see some way of coordinating

of the United States to this new situation that America is having.

I've known it very well, and I think it's, the measures are profitable for the economy.

I would say, but I would also suggest, Mr. President, that we ask you to try to contain issues that would impede the harm that they might have, whether real or just imagined, or partly and partly effective.

And finally, I'd like to hear from you, which is what I've told you, or I'd like to... Well, let me say that your first meeting is down that way, Tuesday, or whatever.

Wednesday morning, we're going to have the first Seattle meeting.

And then, from Seattle, will be one day, the Seattle, Seattle is my group, the object of Seattle, in this case, is simply to add the agenda that was approved with the program of the innovation to the United States.

And then, the next day, that will be Thursday, you will have the first meetings of the technical group, and at the end of the week, the meetings will arrive there.

He had to be paid for it.

Well, you have made some notes, if you would, of some things which I'd like you to discuss with Dr. Kessinger and Mr. Peterson.

And also, what Morrisworth would become, as you said, so that Dr. Sanford and all of us are on the same wavelength.

Because it would be Friday, really, when we would go through the window to discuss it.

But Friday, that's the public statement.

That's how you make it.

And our people will be there.

First, looking at the action that was taken, as you have implied, it was taken because of some very grave problems in balance of payments and international monetary dislocations.

We had to do it for that reason.

Second, that those problems, I would be the first to recognize, were not caused in any part by Latin America.

Third, however, in acting to deal with those problems so that it would not appear that we were discriminating against one nation or another, you can gather which ones, the major nations, we had to make it across the board.

And also, with regard to the surcharge,

it would have been a violation that can, unless it had been across the board.

Now, looking first at the surcharge, that is temporary.

I said that at the time, and that is temporary, and the surcharge will be re-evaluated as

the exchange rates and other problems that we have with certain countries to become adjusted.

To put it more broadly, for your information, the nations that caused the trouble were not Latin America and not the Muslim countries in other parts of the world.

The nation we had the trouble were our great competitors, the Japanese and the European community.

Japanese, the Germans, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

This doesn't mean they're bad people.

We appreciate that.

But on the other hand, the time has come, as I put it out in a speech in Chicago yesterday, that there was a time 25 years ago when the United States had to help Japan, had to help Germany, had to help England, had to help France because they were on their feet.

Now they're on their feet, they're competing.

And we now have to compete equally.

And we have to get the system worked around so that we don't have this continued outflow, this unfavorable balance of payments, due in great part to inalienable exchange rates and due also to non-tariff barriers in some instances that have been applied.

So we are now in a period of negotiation with those major countries.

to try to develop a relationship which will allow us to compete equitably.

And as those negotiations proceed, the surcharge, of course, would then become no longer necessary.

Now I can't say how temporary

I would not know yet.

It depends on the process of progress and negotiations.

But there is any question the surcharge is temporary.

I do not oppose it otherwise.

I do not believe that the United States built a wall around itself.

Great mistake.

A great mistake, of course, is totally irrelevant to dealing with Latin America.

We need no wall at all.

We need, of course, to provide more assistance so that Latin America can be a better manager.

I mean, the more wealthy countries in Latin America, well, Mexico is an example, is a better trading partner than those like Bolivia that have nothing.

We know that.

I want the countries of Latin America to develop economically because the more they have, the better partners they are in trading.

So we're for that.

So the surcharge will be temporary.

That is my philosophy.

I do not believe

First, I do not believe in the United States increasing territory.

I want to see it moved out.

Second, with regard to the aid program, we have to make some budget cuts with the congressional temper in this country without putting in what we thought was a modest cut in foreign aid.

the Congress would have run away with it.

The Congress is very much against foreign aid at the present time.

They're more tolerant to Latin America than most places.

I mean, there's a strong feeling of friendship, even in the Congress, Democrats and Republicans, for the alliance and for Latin America.

But they counted up things even last time, as you pointed out.

So we put the 10% in there so as to keep, just to give,

Well, what we thought was that he's having cuts down to the employees' pay, I mean, or his health actor pay increases the rest, and some of our programs for the cities and so forth.

If we haven't put this minimum cut before, hey, everybody drew off their hand and said, well, about four days, it's always a living quarter.

That was the reason for that.

Third, with regard to that, however, and this gets to short range and long range,

The commitment that I have made when I first came, before I came into office, after I came into office, even this year, with regard to a continuing program of support of the alliance that that commitment is part of.

I believe in that.

And as this temporary problem recedes,

as it passes, and if we can build congressional support for it, the United States can be counted upon to be an assistance.

You can be sure of that.

I mean, you can be sure of this as long as I am here.

My policy will not be to continue to chop away little by little by Latin America.

Latin America's, our programs and assistance aid loans, et cetera, for Latin America.

The same as with regard to trade, that the trade problem is important.

Our attitudes have not changed here.

We feel that Latin America should have, remember after the rock formation, I said, does have and should have a special relationship with the United States.

Secretary Connolly feels as if you haven't talked to him.

No, I have not.

Did you leave today?

Did he go?

He's in Texas.

When you come back, you come back, I want you to, if you will, go in and have a talk with him.

By himself, just the two of you.

He's the taxidermist.

I know what you mean.

I mean to respond to the funeral.

He has some ideas on this subject, long-range ideas.

I'd like you to talk to him before, with regard, because this is a treasure.

The Treasury will have great influence on this, more influence than the state at this time, because they don't state them before the Treasury's gonna get the money.

And because the finance minister, he's a very powerful man.

Now, we come to the immediate problem of what you can say and what can be said at your conference.

I think until our people get down there for the

I think you and your conversations should say that you had a talk with me that I have pointed out that the measures that have been taken here were not taken, were not directed against

Well, I put my speech against any country.

Well, basically, basically, we're not directed at all against Latin America.

Latin America was not the problem that caused us to take these actions.

Let's begin with that proposition.

It was not.

Second, that as far as the surcharge is concerned, and particularly as far as Latin America is concerned, it is temporary.

And Latin America need not be concerned about its long range of activities.

Third, with regard to the foreign aid, that also is a necessary budget adjustment that we have made at this time.

But that looking down the road, that the American interest in and commitment to a continuing daily program for Latin America is still just as firm as it ever was.

And also that we will welcome

we would welcome from our friends in America and the ministers that meet there, they're addressing themselves to the long-range problems.

What should the relationship of the United States be to the alliance for the next 10 years?

I like the idea of our looking forward 10 years.

I've got Mr. Peterson now, who is very interested in this.

I think if the ambassador has the time, and if Peterson is in town,

I'd like for him to give him this same briefing.

Would you do that, Pete?

He is the head of our new Council of Interagents.

I'm very apologetic.

He knows all these things.

He knows the problem is about the Japanese, and it's about the drugs, and it's about the...

They are very good friends, but they're just competing very little to the moment and causing some problems.

So you weren't defending them all these years?

Sure, sure, exactly.

But he understands your problems.

And I'd like for you to give him your thinking.

Maybe you don't.

Maybe you haven't formalized it yourself and are in a long-range situation to be.

But...

and escape feelings about the situation.

So, as I would sum it up, I would like for you, you personally, everybody to ask you, you know, you've seen the President, you tell him, look, you say you can count on him.

You just say that.

Count on him.

You can.

I mean, I'm a friend of Latin America.

I understand it, not only because of friendship,

But more than that, that because of our common interests, because of where we are, because our economies happen to fit together, we're not repetitive, basically.

We more fit together.

That we have to develop this working relationship.

Also, the future of Latin America concerns me greatly.

I don't want to see Latin America feeling that it's sort of out in the field and forgotten.

So that all these revolutionary forces with Iraq

and we will have this in mind.

You can say, and then you can also point out the fact that, as I said, that these measures are temporary, that not directed against Latin America, but that we have to apply them across the board for legal reasons, and just as soon as we can work out these various problems that exist, that it is my desire to

not to have, say, a wall around the United States.

Because I am basically one that is committed to more trade rather than less.

And where we are able to afford to a program of more cooperation and assistance with Latin America, because building it up is good for us as opposed to

Now, that's my philosophy.

Thank you.

I'm very encouraged by what you say, Mr. President.

I'm very happy to see that we are not in the trend that they see so many Americans now, almost Americans, that we take what they call constructive disengagement when they talk about it.

Well, a lot of Americans at the present time are taking in my view a very foolish view.

As I pointed out last night in my speech, they say,

The nations that we helped, and they really referred to the great industrial nations after World War II are now beating us in competition.

They've got our textiles, and they're ahead of us in airplanes, and they're ahead of us in glassware and so forth and so on.

So what we've got to do is now have quotas and have some tariff barriers and the rest, and live within ourselves because we're the greatest market in the world.

That's a short-range policy and a disastrous long-range policy.

Because when any country lives as an idol, when it ceases to try to compete with the rest of the world, when it ceases to try, as I say, to be first, and every country must try to be first in something, in everything, then it ceases to be a great country.

And so I do not, I will, I am going to fight against that tendency.

or the United States, and some of our labor unions feel that way, some of our businessmen feel that way, they say, well, we just can't compete anymore, so we've got to be protected.

We must not let this happen, because America can compete.

There's no question about it.

We're still very rich and very strong.

That's right.

And I intend to continue, but we had to do, this is a shock treatment.

We had to wait a price for ages.

We had to

We had to stop the outflow of our balance of payments, which is, of course, comparing the value of the dollar.

And we had to jolt the other countries into revaluing their currencies so that we had a fair deal.

We had to get some action on the non-tariff barriers, so we took this action.

Now we're in the process of talking about the situation.

Latin America is like a bystander, innocent bystander.

with some of the stray flack that hit you.

But if it's not directed against you, and your long range prospects are just as firm today as they were before the action was taken.

That's very good.

That's really the position.

I'm sure that when I go out, most probably they will ask me, but they don't.

I prefer not to say things or things to you here, because I prefer

There's more work to tell down there.

Therefore, I would suggest that you sort of come out and say that we have coordinated a wide range of subjects from immediate measures that have been taken in Africa and the long run of the international cooperation between us and the United States.

And both sides have had a very positive response.

a positive reassurance of my commitment to a long-range program of cooperation with the alliance and the field of trade with Latin America, and awareness that some of these measures might or that never go away, and that you brought to my attention that some of these measures would revolve on Latin America, even though Latin America was not the cause

of our having to take the pictures.

I was aware that you stated a very good word, the massive bystander of what's in it.

Yeah, the innocent bystander.

He wasn't even buying the standard.

Innocent bystander.

All right.

We're a little bit behind because...

I thank you very much for your courtesy and kindness in receiving me.

Okay.

I think he's most important to all of you.

Yes, well, as soon as you come in, and at this point, I think it would be well, you sit in with Peterson to do what's good and report to Canyon, too.

Would I ask, Mr. Martin, because I'm leaving today, I would like to remake this conversation for my own benefit as well.

Sure.

And send me with anyone from my office.

You make a cover.

Oh, sure.

So I can know exactly what you think is convenient for me to say to the university staff.

Sure, sure.

Because I have already a distinction here.

I'm going to suggest to try to ask, you know, I'm waiting on the temperature, etc.,

but I say after this.

I have spoken with the president and I say this.

You should be free though, let me suggest to play a little game here.

You go a little further.

You might even, I have no objection to your asking us to wait for a second.

You might, but you would have more independent decisions.

And so she said, well, deal with that.

And so you talked to me about it.

And I said, well, it is temporary.

We can't make sure that we're considering it.

But I think it's very important.

I know the politics of Latin America, the politics of America.

And you've got to be an actor.

Everybody else is.

You're very kind.

You hit a complete record of what you have.

Mr.

Banner, as you personally are working to this thing, we want to...

work with our friend.

And he called very happy because, as I told you, he was very worried.

But you know why?

He has his back.

It's not worthwhile.

But he can't go and have it taken down, no.

Now, the 10% velocity warning, we have to just leave that bird.

It's basically just a realistic action.

But that is not something that is...

That's not being done on a case-by-case basis.

It's not across the board.

It's much more important that you say, well, I'm looking at 10% surcharge, which is what I want.

But it is going to be so tempered, so...

The longer you have these measures, the more different the credit would be to the way...

Mr. President, thank you very much.

Thank you.