Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
January 11, 2017
Document Release Date: 
December 17, 2010
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
March 17, 1972
Content Type: 
PDF icon LOC-HAK-460-6-4-0.pdf225.65 KB
A" - C" ^ -' 1+}'71 No Objection to Declassification in Full 2010/12/17: LOC-HAK-460-6-4-0 ) , ~~-'h) DOS, OSD Reviews Completed. TOP -GrYGR-ET r and NATO Da sate 5O.O rnan cut in NATO. alt. * 4uced the Army from the planned 1$ to 11-Z/3 divisions and eft, wry ,close to passing the Mansfield Amendment calling for a o rl,a eats: Last year, Congress cut the Army 50, 000 man-years with reegard to its overall military manpower requests and NATO The Administration faces a thugh battle In Congress again this year the recent progress made by our Allies in force improvements. by l i-sfield.(you will recall that Irgvin's response indicated general acceptance of, the idea of limited cuts as long as they were teen from :support author thanbornbat.) It is essential that the Administration speiik with one voice on NATO starting from the premise that any cuts would have serious adverse. political effects in view of the President's public +tommitaments `to NATO.: This is especially true considering mitten might forestall a larger cut which will inevitably be proposed disciiiaion that he believed an 8-10, 000 cut in NATO made by the ComO nadir Steam s"made clear to Under Secretary Irwin to an earlier I have -discussed this with Under Secretary Irwin; Yes attitude after-Chile's other creditors i,ave indicated their positionab . are still uncertaian, and we will bo in a better position to .decide on our and whether or' not a 8ftG,meeet ng ahotdd be held to consider Initial .and .:bak".pc-aitians for dur delegation to the Paris Club meetings. A S G meeting had been scheduled but was postponed. Treasury prefers not have a meeting now, because the dates of the Paris Club ,meetings y~ we sent yoa a ham Tab A) on the R3a Ada,. Chile debt negotiations um. &-arls 1-1-ap jai. !hate"!s.conce rned "t our final decision. on Chile's debt will be reacha4 Lion. -'Under Secretary Irwin sent lrou a mernoranduxia; (Tab C) objecting inn' solely financial groiWds. without adsquate -olittcal input or considers,- No Objection to Declassification in Full 2010/12/17: LOC-HAK-460-6-4-0 Objection to Declassification in Full 2010/12/17: LOC-HAK-460-6-4-0 an opportunity to;axakae an,.1np t to the decision. the foreign policy I plicationi of the .issue and give ".'Other ageacieas tt c reockedn` -g a meetiixag *t the.SRG would be held in`order to oxxi"Q a all Sec .try Connally to ask that prior to any ft dae ai< 16 1 R'd as scheduled. I m our memo to you, we reca~atx-nac~eixd> to the postponement of the SRG meeting and r*conjnjg2jTM position. He also may claim stiflably).that State was not consulted a x v of the imca and strstagiae'aroectsof the decision regarding'our. xaaiaiet the Ghiloaa debt vasstioaai, ` .mpbaiising the importance ~-tn aaaaa L < on the decision to postpone the SRo. on . i>eal grounds, You may wish to t*U Irvin your cau'vo tare of the Chilean debt decision, and that it should o bee made solely Secretary o>nna jr.. I have discussed this with Undo Sec u t A!" tatance Shortfall Secretary lrwlnz Yes, - . We are studying the Secretary's Mars 14 ,options memo on ways of dealing with the shortfall. ?- > is cisar that something must be dos m to alleviate abed concerns Shultz is concerned over the effects of as 11 72 aupplemental:.- S41YRAbA1~~!1wA\~le" . Pry- - -' ww~.n -rte.. - ,~~.~ ~ T gyp- _.. - - arepaid out of WY 73 funds, ,and it could lead to the' elisanination of Section lees th arrbie ittalls of Dian is rou -w it could be seen as a ?? -We' note that State favors a section 508 deter zniaation; butte (roc ended by Defense) on the- President's a enditurs :ceiling. SO6 altogether. - w . , oa ,eau ae ' 3ook at an aasaend- elution at the low 171 levels" and then aavr k. -- In light of the Congressional cliaaA,ate this year and the necessity. for favorable action an our T Y 73 request, wouldn't it he preferable-to and hopefully avoid a continuing .,; t i that "reeu?s' top r-riority now moot or #: * ppieaaac~e ntal?lstet7` .. ~..,, ' TOP SECT r we