Letter from Adelaide Skier, President of the Rancho Bernardo Republican Women’s Club of San Diego, California, to President Gerald R. Ford Regarding the Panama Canal

GENERAL FG87 M F09 May 8, 1975 Calif Repullican Women is club Dear Mrs. Skier: Samuel The President has asked me to reply to your letter of March 21 concerning the Panama Canal treaty negotiations. Your expression of concern is appre- ciated, and I have forwarded a copy of your letter to the Department of State in order that it may be brought to the attention of appropriate officials con- cerned with the negotiations. You may be assured that the question of United States interests in the Panama Canal and how we might best protect them has been subject to the most thorough review and continues to receive concerted attention throughout the Executive Branch. Our principal goal in these negotiations is to protect United States inter- ests over the long term. Panama has been discontented with the Treaty of 1903 since its inception and has pressed for more favorable terms with increasing intensity in recent years. We believe it should prove possible to negotiate a new treaty relationship with Panama which will protect basic United States interests in the Canal (including provision for the operation and defense of the Canal by the United States for an extended period of time) while meeting some of Panama's concerns and desires. It is our belief that this is the most effective way to assure access to the Canal over the long term. The talks, however, are still continuing and a number of difficult issues remain to be discussed. RECEIVED MAY 9 1975 CENTRAL FILES FORDO GERALD LIBRARY - 2 - Any decision which the President might make affecting the future of the Canal will protect United States interests, and any treaty would be subject to full constitutional process including approval by the Senate. With the President's best wishes, Sincerely, Roland L. Elliott Director of Correspondence Mrs. Samuel Skier 12645 Higa Place San Diego, California 92128 RLE:State:NSC:JHH:aby FORD & LIBRARY GERALD - DATE: 5/7/75 TO: Jim This writer's March21 letter has beenanswered tain Files. Pat Byrne 1904 NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL May 5, 1975 MEMO FOR: JEANNE W. DAVIS FROM: STEPHEN LO W CP SUBJECT: Letter to Mrs. Skier re Panama Canal Treaty Negotiations Attached for your signature is a memo to Roland Elliott forwarding a suggested reply on the Panama Canal treaty negotiations to Mrs. Skier, President of a San Diego Republican Women's Club. FORD LIBRARY is GERALD 1904 MEMORANDUM NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL May 5, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: ROLAND ELLIOTT FROM: JEANNE W. DAVIS OMO SUBJECT: Letter to Mrs. Skier re Panama Canal Treaty Negotiations Mrs. Skier, President of the Rancho Bernardo Republican Women's Club in San Diego, wrote the President on March 21 urging that there be no change in the U.S. treaty relationship with Panama (Tab B). Attached for your signature at Tab A is a suggested response to Mrs. Skier noting that any treaty negotiated will protect basic U.S. interests in the Canal and would be subject to full constitutional process. Attachments: Tab A: Suggested response to Mrs. Skier Tab B: Incoming FORD LIBRARY & GERALD Suggested Reply Dear Mrs. Skier: The President has asked me to reply to your letter of Final March 21 concerning the Panama Canal treaty negotiations. Your expression of concern is appreciated and I have forwarded a copy of your letter to the Department of State in order that it may be brought to the attention of appropriate officials concerned with the negotiations. You may be assured that the question of United States interests in the Panama Canal and how we might best protect them has been subject to the most thorough review and continues to receive concerted attention throughout the Executive Branch. Our principal goal in these negotiations is to protect United States interests over the long term. Panama has been discontented with the Treaty of 1903 since its inception and has pressed for more favorable terms with increasing intensity in recent years. We believe it should prove possible to negotiate a new treaty relationship with Panama which will protect basic United States interests in the Canal (including provision for the operation and defense of the Canal by the United States for an extended period of time) while meeting some of Panama's concerns and desires. It is our belief that this is the most effective way to assure access to the Canal over the long term. The talks, however, are still continuing and a number of difficult issues remain to be discussed. (continued) FORD & LIBRARY SERALD 2 Any decision which the Pre sident might make affecting the future of the Canal will protect United States interests, and any treaty would be subject to full constitutional process including approval by the Senate. with the P', bent with, Sincerely, RLE Mrs. Samuel Skier 12645 Higa Place San Diego, California 92128 RLE/SHI /NSC/JA FORD i LIBRARY GERALD B UNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION) DEPARTMENT OF STATE S/S: 7506142 EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT TRANSMITTAL FORM Date: April 8, 1975 For: Lt. Gen. Brent Scowcroft National Security Council The White House Pursuant to referral datedMarch 27, 1975 NSC No. 7501904 (if any) a copy of which is attached, we are enclosing the following: Information copy of direct reply Translation Other X Draft reply for: President's signature X Other signature We believe no response is necessary for the reason cited below The attached item, which was sent directly to the Department of State, is being forwarded for your attention. We believe no response is necessary for the reason cited below A draft reply is attached A draft reply will be forwarded A translation is attached Other REMARKS: DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: To: President Ford From: Adelaide Skier Date: March 21, 1975 Subject: US policy towards the Panama Canal Zone Puble Elenrs (for) George S. Springsteen Executive Secretary FORD i LIBRARY GERALD UNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION) SUGGESTED REPLY Dear Mrs. Skier: President Ford has asked that I reply to your let- ter of March 21 concerning the Panama Canal treaty ne- gotiations. You may be assured that the question of United States interests in the Panama Canal and how we might best protect them has been subject to the most thorough review and con- tinues to receive concerted attention throughout the Execu- tive Branch. Our principal goal in these negotiations is to protect U.S. interests. Panama has been discontented with the Treaty of 1903 since its inception and has pressed for more favorable terms with increasing intensity in recent years. Treaty revisions were made in 1936 and 1955. But the most objectionable feature from Panama's viewpoint -- United States exercise of rights as if sovereign in the Canal Zone in perpetuity -- remained unchanged. The Canal has become the major political issue in Panama as well as a continuing source of tension Mrs. Samuel Skier, President, Republican Women's Club, Federated, 12645 Higa Place, San Diego, California 92128. Department of State FORD LIBRARY if GERALD - 2 - in U.S.-Panamanian relations. A flag raising incident in the Canal Zone in 1964 led to riots and the death of 20 Panamanians and 4 Americans. After considering all the factors, and recognizing that a disgruntled and resentful government and people in Panama could create a situation in which United States interests in the Canal would be seriously threatened, the resumption of treaty negotiations with Panama was under- taken. The negotiations began in June 1971 and have been renewed under a new U.S. chief negotiator, Ambassador at Large Ellsworth Bunker. Primary United States objectives in the negotia- tions are: the right to administer, operate and defend the Canal for an extended period of time; an option to ex- pand capacity, either by adding a third set of locks or building a new sea-level canal; and most importantly, a viable treaty arrangement which provides the basis for an enduring, mutually acceptable relationship with Panama. As in all negotiations both sides have put forth positions. Many issues remain to be resolved and negoti- ations are continuing. We cannot predict when an agree- ment on a new treaty will be reached. Any decision which the President might make affect- ing the future of the Canal will, of course, protect United States interests. In fact, a major reason for initiating FORD & LIBRARY GERALD these negotiations is to head off a crisis which would en- - 3 - danger those interests. A treaty, of course, would be submitted to the Senate for approval and would be subject to full constitutional process. Information concerning the issues involved in the Canal treaty negotiations is contained in the enclosed copy of the Background and Status of the Panama Canal Treaty Negotiations prepared by the Office of Panamanian Affairs. I hope you will call on me if you believe we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, FORD LIBRARY i SERALD THE DEPARTMENT LUNUNS OF STATE News Release: January 1975 Bureau of Public Affairs Office of Media-Services PANAMA CANAL TREATY NEGOTIATIONS: GERALD BACKGROUND AND CURRENT STATUS Background Canal, rearrangement of markets and sources, product exchanges, and partial or complete sub- The United States and Panama are currently stitution of land or air transport for ocean trans- negotiating a new Panama Canal treaty to replace port. As canal users take advantage of these the Treaty of 1903. alternatives, the canal's value declines relative to In that treaty Panama granted the United the economies of the user nations. For the States-in perpetuity-the use of a 10-mile wide United States, in particular, a recent study has zone of Panamanian territory for the "construc- shown that the canal's impact on the domestic tion, maintenance, operation and protection" of economy is quite small compared to the economy a canal, as well as all the rights, power, and as a whole. authority within that zone which the United States would "possess if it were the sovereign." Panamanian Treaty Concerns The very favorable terms of the treaty were a major factor in the U.S. decision to build the Panama has been dissatisfied with the treaty for canal in Panama rather than in Nicaragua as many years. Part of this dissatisfaction has de- initially planned. rived from Panama's interpretation of two aspects of the situation which resulted in the Treaty of Canal's Economic Value 1903: (1) Panama's acceptance of unfavorable treaty terms due to its dependence upon the Since its opening in 1914, the canal has pro- United States to protect its new-found indepen- vided benefits to the United States, to Panama, dence from Colombia; and (2) Panama's principal and to the world. Of the total tonnage that negotiator was a Frenchman who benefited transits the canal, about 44 percent originates in, considerably when the United States purchased and 22 percent is destined for, U.S. ports. This the private French concession to build a trans- tonnage represents about 16 percent of the total isthmian canal. U.S. export and import tonnages. Over the years Panama has also charged that The canal has been economically important to the United States has unilaterally interpreted the Panama, too. More than 30 percent of Panama's treaty to Panama's disadvantage and given Panama foreign exchange earnings and nearly 13 percent an inadequate share of the benefits from the op- of its GNP are directly or indirectly attributed to eration of the waterway. Even more objection- the presence of the canal. But those contribu- able in Panama's view, are the provisions in the tions represent a smaller portion of Panama's Treaty of 1903 which give to a foreign power in economy now than they did in years past. perpetuity governmental jurisdiction within a In fact, reliance on the canal by all parties has portion of Panamanian territory. Increasingly in evolved from earlier years. As trading patterns recent years Panama has insisted that U.S. control have changed and world commerce has become over the Canal Zone prevents the country from more sophisticated, alternatives to the canal have realizing its full economic potential. begun to emerge. These alternatives include the The United States has responded sympathet- use of larger vessels which would bypass the ically to some of these Panamanian concerns. In 2 3 1905 it recognized Panama's titular sovereignty President Nixon established negotiating objectives served as a useful framework for the present the United States require to accomplish its over the Canal Zone. The treaty was revised in which, although modified by developments, were negotiations. purpose? 1936, and again in 1955, to provide Panama similar to those set by President Johnson in 1964. 3. Jurisdiction: What areas will be controlled with a greater share of the economic benefits of The objectives and positions of the United States U.S. Treaty Objective and what functions will be exercised by the the canal and to remove certain outdated aspects, thus reflect a bipartisan approach to treaty nego- United States when its jurisdiction terminates, such as the right granted to the United States to tiations with Panama. They also are consistent The principal objective of the United States and what is the period of transition? interfere, when it believed necessary, in Panama's with the broader policy stated in Secretary in the current treaty negotiations is to protect 4. Expansion of Capacity: How will the internal affairs. Despite these modifications, how- Kissinger's call in October 1973 for a "new dia- our basic interests in the Panama Canal. The treaty provide for possible enlargement of canal ever, many of the features of the treaty most logue" with our Latin American neighbors, a U.S. Government is seeking to establish a new and capacity? objectionable to Panama remain unchanged. policy which President Ford has publicly endorsed. mutually acceptable relationship between our 5. Participation: How and to what extent The canal has become the major political issue A Panamanian negotiating team arrived in two countries whereby the United States will re- will Panama participate in the administration and in Panama. In recent years the intensification of Washington in June 1971. Intensive negotiations tain essential rights to continue operating and defense of the canal? Panama's campaign for more favorable treaty during the rest of the year resulted in a U.S. defending the canal for a reasonably extended 6. Compensation: What will be the form and terms has produced tensions in U.S.-Panamanian treaty offer covering most of the issues relevant period of time. A new treaty based on partner- level of economic benefits to Panama in any new relations. In 1964 the death of 20 Panamanians to the treaty. The Panamanian negotiators carried ship with Panama would enable the United States treaty? and 4 Americans brought the Panama Canal issue the offer to Panama for a review in December to devote all its energies to the efficient operation to the attention of the United Nations and the 1971. Except for some informal conversations in of the waterway. Moreover, it would provide a Current Status of Negotiations Organization of American States (OAS). March 1972 and an exchange of correspondence friendly environment in Panama that is most con- in the fall, the negotiations were not resumed ducive to protecting our vital interests in keeping Since June 1974, the talks have been taking Evaluation of Bilateral Negotiations for a New until December 1972, when a U.S. delegation the canal open and secure. Such a treaty would place in a cordial, informal atmosphere. The Treaty traveled to Panama. be consistent with good business management, U.S. negotiators have been proceeding carefully represent good foreign and defense policy, and and methodically. While there is no fixed time- Following discussion of the issue by the OAS, U.S. Security Council Action signify a new era of cooperation between the table, the negotiators from both countries have the United Nations, and other international agen- United States and the rest of the hemisphere. indicated their satisfaction with the progress to cies after the 1964 riots, the United States and At Panama's initiative, the U.N. Security In recent years Latin American nations have date and are hopeful that both countries can Panama agreed in 1964 to begin bilateral negotia- Council met in Panama City from March 15 to made the negotiation of a more equitable canal reach agreement on a draft treaty. tions for a new treaty. In so doing, the United March 21, 1973. In those sessions, Panama criti- treaty with Panama a major hemispheric issue Any decision which the President might make States recognized that a comprehensive moderni- cized the U.S. posture on the canal question and and a test of U.S. intentions regarding the "new affecting the future of the canal will, of course, zation of its relationship with Panama correspond- sought a resolution supporting its position. Thir- dialogue." be designed to protect U.S. interests. Indeed, a ed to its long-term national interests and to a teen nations voted for the resolution; the United major reason for negotiating a new treaty is to changing international environment. Kingdom abstained. The United States vetoed Issues in the Negotiations avert a serious crisis which would endanger our U.S. officials entered the negotiations in late the resolution on the grounds that it recognized interests. 1964 with a view to insuring that: Panama's needs but not those of the United In the months following the February 7 signing Any treaty agreed upon by the negotiators and The canal should continue to be available to States; that it was incomplete in its references to of the Statement of Principles, Ambassador approved by the executive branch will be submit- the world's commercial vessels on an equal the negotiations; and that it was inappropriate Bunker and Foreign Minister Tack met several ted to the U.S. Senate for ratification and subject basis at reasonable tolls; because the treaty was a bilateral matter under times in Panama and Washington to define the to full constitutional process. Panama, for its It should be operated and defended by the amicable negotiations. In explaining the U.S. issues involved in the new treaty arrangement. part, has said that it will submit the new treaty United States for a reasonably extended, but position, the U.S. Permanent Representative com- After agreement was reached, the negotiators to a plebiscite to insure that it is acceptable to definite, period of time; and mitted the United States to peaceful adjustment moved into substantive talks aimed at resolving the Panamanian people. It should continue to serve world commerce of its differences with Panama and invited these issues. efficiently. To this end, the United States Panama to continue serious treaty negotiations. The United States and Panama have agreed in sought the right to provide additional canal principle that the Treaty of 1903 should be re- capacity if it is needed. New U.S. Approach placed by a modern treaty that rejects the concept By 1967, the negotiators of both countries had of perpetuity and accommodates the sovereignty STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES prepared three draft treaties. They provided for In September 1973 Secretary Kissinger charged of Panama with the interests of the United States, operation of the present canal under a joint U.S.- Ambassador at Large Ellsworth Bunker with the on the understanding that U.S. control and de- Joint Statement by the Honorable Henry A. Panamanian authority; for construction and op- task of renewing discussions with Panamanian fense of the Panama Canal would continue for a Kissinger, Secretary of State of the United eration of a sea-level canal under a similar joint officials for the purpose of arriving at a common period of fixed duration. In the context of the States of America, and His Excellency Juan authority; and for U.S. defense of the old and approach to future treaty negotiations. Ambas- Statement of Principles the issues the two nego- Antonio Tack, Minister of Foreign Affairs of new canals for the duration of each treaty. Nei- sador Bunker visited Panama from November 26 tiating parties are working to resolve are: the Republic of Panama, on February 7, 1974 ther Panama nor the U.S. Government moved to to December 3, 1973, and again on January 6 1. Duration: How long will the new treaty at Panama ratify these treaties, and the new government and 7, 1974, to discuss with Panamanian Foreign remain in force? headed by General Omar Torrijos, which assumed Minister Juan Antonio Tack general principles 2. Operation and Defense: What rights and The United States of America and the Repub- power in October 1968, formally rejected them. upon which a new treaty might be based. These arrangements will the United States have to lic of Panama have been engaged in negotiations In 1970 the Government of Panama requested discussions resulted in the Statement of Principles permit it to continue to operate, maintain, and to conclude an entirely new treaty respecting the renewal of negotiations and the U.S. agreed. of February 7, 1974 (See p. 3), which has defend the canal? What geographic areas will the Panama Canal, negotiations which were made 4 possible by the Joint Declaration between the dance with what that treaty states, the right to two countries of April 3, 1964, agreed to under use the lands, waters and airspace which may be the auspices of the Permanent Council of the necessary for the operation, maintenance, protec- Organization of American States acting provision- tion and defense of the canal and the transit of ally as the Organ of Consultation. The new ships. treaty would abrogate the treaty existing since 5. The Republic of Panama shall have a just 1903 and its subsequent amendments, establish- and equitable share of the benefits derived from ing the necessary conditions for a modern rela- the operation of the canal in its territory. It is tionship between the two countries based on the recognized that the geographic position of its most profound mutual respect. territory constitutes the principal resource of the Since the end of last November, the authorized Republic of Panama. representatives of the two governments have been 6. The Republic of Panama shall participate holding important conversations which have per- in the administration of the canal, in accordance mitted agreement to be reached on a set of fun- with a procedure to be agreed upon in the treaty. damental principles which will serve to guide the The treaty shall also provide that Panama will negotiators in the effort to conclude a just and assume total responsibility for the operation of equitable treaty eliminating, once and for all, the the canal upon the termination of the treaty. The causes of conflict between the two countries. Republic of Panama shall grant to the United The principles to which we have agreed, on States of America the rights necessary to regulate behalf of our respective governments, are as the transit of ships through the canal and operate, follows: maintain, protect and defend the canal, and to undertake any other specific activity related to 1. The treaty of 1903 and its amendments those ends, as may be agreed upon in the treaty. will be abrogated by the conclusion of an entirely 7. The Republic of Panama shall participate new interoceanic canal treaty. with the United States of America in the pro- 2. The concept of perpetuity will be eliminated. tection and defense of the canal in accordance The new treaty concerning the lock canal shall with what is agreed upon in the new treaty. have a fixed termination date. 8. The United States of America and the 3. Termination of United States jurisdiction Republic of Panama, recognizing the important over Panamanian territory shall take place prompt- services rendered by the interoceanic Panama ly in accordance with terms specified in the treaty. Canal to international maritime traffic, and bear- 4. The Panamanian territory in which the canal ing in mind the possibility that the present canal is situated shall be returned to the jurisdiction of could become inadequate for said traffic, shall the Republic of Panama. The Republic of Panama, agree bilaterally on provisions for new projects in its capacity as territorial sovereign, shall grant which will enlarge canal capacity. Such provi- to the United States of America, for the duration sions will be incorporated in the new treaty in ac- of the new interoceanic canal treaty and in accor- cord with the concepts established in principle 2. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S.A. POSTAGE AND fees PAID DEPARTMENT OF STATE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20520 STA-501 THIRD CLASS BULK RT. FORD LIBRARY Unclassified CLASSIFICATION NSC REFERRAL TO STATE SECRETARIAT Date: March 28, 1975 MEMORANDUM FOR: GEORGE SPRINGSTEEN NSC LOG# 7501904 EXECUTIVE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF STATE DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: TO: Predident Ford FROM: Adelaide Skier DATE: March 21, 1975x SUBJECT: US policy towards the zanama Canal Zone ACTION REQUESTED: XX DRAFT REPLY FOR: PRESIDENT'S SIGNATURE WHITE HOUSE STAFF SIGNATURE OTHER DIRECT REPLY FURNISH INFO COPY DISPATCH RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS TRANSLATION APPROPRIATE HANDLING INFORMATION FOR ADDITIONAL PROCESSING AS INDICATED: DUE DATE: April 8, 1975 URGENT ROUTINE XXXXXXX COMMENTS: for JEANNE W. DAVIS Fundy ann faction ann Kachior Staff Secretary Unclassified. GERALD LIBRARY FORD CLASSIFICATION Rancho Я Bernardo REPUBLICAN WOMEN'S CLUB, FEDERATED SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92128 March 21, 1975 The Honorable Gerald Ford President of the United States Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Mr. President: Subject: Panama Canal American citizens are no longer able to let our government give away everything that belongs to us without making a protest loud and clear. This letter is a plea for sanity in regard to any possible alter- ation of our Panama Canal Treaty which gave us sovereignty in perpetuity over the 10-mile strip of swamp. We purchased the Panama Canal Zone just as we purchased Louisiana and the Territory of Alaska. We have borne every expense of building and maintaining the Canal. We make additional annual payments to the Panamanian Government of almost $2 million. The United States has created all the wealth that exists in Panama and supplies Panama with one-third of its national income. Apart from the tremendous commercial value of the Panama Canal to the entire maritime activities of the world, there is an immeasurable strategic value too. Panama now exists under the iron rule of General Omar Torrijos who siezed power in 1968. He is notoriously pro-Communist. If we should be so foolish as to re-negotiate a new treaty surrendering our Canal to the Panamanian regime, the Communists would be in control and our own shipping would be a disaster. It is unthinkable, Mr. President, that you would permit Henry Kissinger to continue his dealings for the great give-away. The signers of this letter are completely earnest in their request for a halt to any proposed changes in the Canal Zone Treaty. Sincerely, Darlaide m. Skier Mrs. Samuel Skier, President 12645 Higa Place San Diego, California 92128 Attached are signatures of the membersoof the Rancho Bernardo Republican Women's Club, Federated, meeting in Rancho Bernardo on Friday, March 21, 1975. GERALD FORD LIBRARY Garlaide Skier Leora L.Zard RAGE GERALD GERALD R FOR Evabelle Beckett Mildred a. Downs & Elfoeda ORied #inifred marty Betty O. Rayer alice Curtis. anna m. Standson allen Curt Lillian m. Freese Dorothy H. Back Virgie Hierce Ama Haffman many a. Cossmann yladgs Hough alvined Richard Jessic m. Rose alyce T. Shambaugh Clara Priestly Hapel Quackenbuch Anne middel Van Quackenloush Lucile Q. Meishe marie Dennison Violet V. Cobden Grace a. me Indae Robert J Cobden Felice Thunk Eureth Woef Douglas Lillian C Heiss Dradin Northawe Associate Member Jean W. Coutts Searly. Hoodforese Mariame C. Hale J. Maire marie withinto Hiidlereder madge m. Chapman Winifred R, Pinto Florence Herres Teresa L Trouard May a. gillmann Florence T.Williams Geodep Me Johnson Marie Jashill Margarete 6. Francis Landa m Wilson of awer maism FORD & LIBRARY GERALD Helen Lamb Frost mariou R.Hellberg E his abouth H. Valeley Louise L. noble Ade adeline D. & have Lucile a. Meiske la Gray Packard Clarence Simonson Cincerne Opp Nasey Johnstn Margurit DHelled Frank a. McIndoe Sally R. Richison FORD & LIBRARY GERALD frene D Devine DOC RECD LOG NBR INITIAL ACTION O NSC CORRESPONDENCE PROFILE MO DA MO DA HR 3 21 3 27 16 7501904 SKIER, H ADRLAIDE M/5 S/S referenCe: CIRCLE AS APPROPRIATE TO: PRES + FROM: KISSINGER, UNCLAS LOG IN/OUT kissinger COLBY, W OTHER LOU NO FORN NODIS SOURCE/CLASS/DESCRIPTION SCOWCROFT SCHLESINGER, J C EYES ONLY EXDIS DAVIS ST EX SEC S CODEWORD TS sensitive SUBJECT: Ack LTR To Pres fm SKIER of a San Dugo Republican Women Club ursing no change in Count zone trunty INTERNAL ROUTING w/ AND Pandrad DISTRIBUTION REC ACTION required ACTION INFO CY ADVANCE CYS TO HAK/SCOWCROFT FOR MEMO for hak ( ) STAFF SECRETARY MEMO FOR pres ( ) REPLY FOR FAR EAST ( ) APPROPRIATE ACTION ( ) DISTRIBUTION/INITIAL ACTION ASGMT SUb-sAharaN AFRICA MID EAST / NO. AFRICA / so. ASIA MEMO TO ( ) EUROPE / CANADA RECOMMENDATIONS ( ) LATIN AMERICA OINT memo - ) x REFER TO FOR: ( ) UNITED NATIONS + ECONOMIC ANY ACTION NECESSARY? ( ) SCIENTIFIC CONCURRENCE. ( ) program ANALYSIS DUE DATE: NSC PLANNING COMMENTS: (INCLUDING SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS) CONGRESSIONAL OCEANS POLICY INTELLIGENCE DATE FROM TO S SUBSEQUENT ACTION REQUIRED (OR TAKEN): CY TO 3/27 STATE D Droft Reply (4/08) 4/8 Read State droft 750614 SUBSEQUENT ROUTING/ACTIONS 4/8 Low S Memo DANIS to R Elliott (4/20) 5/6 Low & 5/5 0 David Elipte id Mero to l Elliet DISPATCH CY RQMTS: SEE ABOVE PLUS: microfilm & FILE RQMTS: NSC/S DISP INSTR NOTIFY & DATE BY MAY 14 1975 special DISPOSITION: SA SF X OPEN CRT ID: 6AB CROSS REF W/ HP NS SUSPENSE CY ATTACHED: FOLDER: Close MAIL WH EP PA DY (NBC-74-21)