Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
66328747
label
Grain Embargo
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
Source extras
naId
66328747
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1985-12-31
year
1985
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1de739a9841d8bf3
ocrText
WITHDRAWAL SHEET Ronald Reagan Library Collection: Cicconi, James W.: Files Archivist: kdb OA/Box: Box 9 FOIA ID: F1997-066/6, D. Cohen File Folder: Grain Embargo Date: 08/11/2004 DOCUMENT NO. SUBJECT/TITLE DATE RESTRICTION & TYPE 1. memo Donald Regan to William Clark re 7/26/82 meeting of Senior 7/26/82 B1 Interagency Group on International Economic Policy [w/notations], B3 1p PAr 10/23/07 NLRRF97 -066/9 # 18 2. note to Jim Baker, 1p [Item is still under review under the provisions of EO 7/27/82 13233] 3. draft re John Block preferred guidance, 1p [Item is still under review under 7/27/82 the provisions of EO 13233] RESTRICTIONS B-1 National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]. B-2 Release could disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]. B-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]. B-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or financial information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]. B-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]. B-7 Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]. B-7a Release could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings [(b)(7)(A) of the FOIA]. B-7b Release would deprive an individual of the right to a fair trial or impartial adjudication [(b)(7)(B) of the FOIA] B-7c Release could reasonably be expected to cause unwarranted invasion or privacy [(b)(7)(C) of the FOIA]. B-7d Release could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source [(b)(7)(D) of the FOIA]. B-7e Release would disclose techniques or procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions or would disclose guidelines which could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law [(b)(7)(E) of the FOIA]. B-7f Release could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual [(b)(7)(F) of the FOIA]. B-8 Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]. B-9 Release would disclose geological or geophysical information concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]. C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of gift. CHINA GRAIN 1 / year extrusion 2 Rain - minimum (from - to there consultation process with Loviets - up to 15mm metric tons, subject to Pres' OK. (#2) Letter not announced until after initial critact so we don't get a turndorm Soviet from GRAIN STATEMENT OPTIONS: 1. I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to propose an extension for one year of the existing no NSC/State grain agreement with the Soviet Union. I have reference further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to to "limits" consult with the Soviet Union, as normally con- ducted under the agreement, with respect to purchasing additional amounts of grain beyond those specified in the agreement. 2. I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to USDA4 propose an extension for one year of the existing authorizes others, plus grain agreement with the Soviet Union. I have raising the further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to limits in WH Political consult with the Soviet Union, as normally con- the & legislative ducted under the agreement, with respect to agreement offices raising the current minimum level for grain 608" purchases beyond that which is specified in the agreement. 3. I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to reference Compromise propose an extension for one year of the existing to higher grain agreement with the Soviet Union. I have (inits, but further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to only on consult with the Soviet Union, as normally conducted "addi "additional tional under the agreement, with respect to higher limits purchases on purchases of additional amounts of grain beyond those specified in the agreement. beyond the "648" limits in the agreement No DIS DEPARTMENT 1 AMERICANT THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY B3 1111 RT WASHINGTON 1744 July 26, 1982 MEMORANDUM FOR: WILLIAM P. CLARK ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS SUBJECT: Meeting of the Senior Interagency Group on International Economic Policy (SIG-IEP), July 26, 1982 At the meeting of the SIG-IEP today, the group decided as follows: -- The majority recommended that the Secretary of Agriculture be authorized to propose a simple extension of the Grain Agreement for one year. -- The majority further recommended that after the Agreement is extended, the Secretary of Agriculture will be Raisew/ authorized, pursuant to the Agreement, to consult with the Soviets as to possible purchase of higher amounts than those Societ provided for in the Agreement. While all participants could possibility accept this result, the Secretary of Agriculture would have OF preferred attempting to get from the Soviets agreement to auth higher minimums as part of the one-year extension of the Agreement, and the Secretary of Defense would have preferred letting the Agreement lapse. -- The group also recommended that, before announcement J high of any decision, discussion with allies should take place and, ands. therefore, if possible, the announcement should be delayed until at least August 2. Voting for their agencies were the following: Secretary Regan Treasury Gradia Secretary Weinberger Defense Under Secretary Buckley State Secretary Block Agriculture Bapalis Secretary Baldrige Commerce Director Stockman OMB Dimean Jerry Jordan CEA David Macdonald USTR DECLASSIFIED IN PART Roger Porter OPD NLRR 197-066/9 #18 CIA BY CH NARA DATE 18/23/17 [(int.) DTR Donald T. Regan Classified by MELeland SECRET Review for declassification 26. 1988. National Security Decision Directive Number U.S. -USSR GRAIN AGREEMENT I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to propose an simple extension for one year of the existing grain agreement with the Soviet Union. I have further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to consult with the Soviet Union, as normally (raspecting limits and and conducted under the agreement, as to possible purchases of higher amounts of grain boyond the 8-m. 8 motric ton levels bryond there specificied in the agreement. The Suntary is not authorized to : myotiate a new long term grain agreemen with the fouid Union MARTY C-8mm FELOSIEIN 00000000000000 ALAN GREENSBAN Min. R 15 wriston for VOLKER (15- - 20mmt) mmt) THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to propose an extension for one year of the existing grain agreement with the Soviet Union. I have further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to consult with the Soviet Union, as normally with sespect TO conducted under additional the agreement, respecting limits and possible purchases of higher amounts of grain beyond those specified in the agreement. The Secretary is not authorized to negotiate a new long-term grain agreement with the Soviet Union. THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to propose an extension for one year of the existing grain agreement with the Soviet Union. I have further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to consult with the Soviet Union, as normally conducted under the agreement, rospecting limits and possible purchases of higher amounts of grain beyond those specified in the agreement. The Secretary is not authorized to negotiate a new long-term grain agreement with the Soviet Union. THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to propose an extension for one year of the existing grain agreement with the Soviet Union. I have further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to consult with the Soviet Union, as normally conducted under the agreement, respecting limits and possible purchases of higher amounts of grain beyond those specified in the agreement. The Secretary is not authorized to negotiate a new long-term grain agreement with the Soviet Union. July 27, 1982 NOTE FOR JIM BAKER: The result of a few quick calls with respect to grain suggests that no one has seen the SIG-IEP memo. The following people believe that the Administration position should be a one year extention of the grain agreement and an authorization for the Secretary of Agriculture to consult with respect to limits and higher purchases of grain. " Baldrige/DOC Brock/USTR Donovan/DOL Edwards/DOE Lewis/DOT Harper/OPD Duberstein Rollins Note: Baldrige, MacDonald (USTR) and Harper all indicated that they had "fought" for "higher limits" during the meeting. DRAFT ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION ON U.S.-USSR GRAIN AGREEMENT The U.S. -Soviet grain agreement, which has governed our grain trade with the Soviet Union since 1976, is due to expire September 30. After discussion in the Cabinet, I have authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to propose to the Soviet Union a simple one-year extension of the existing grain agreement. I have further authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to consult with the Soviet Union, as normally conducted under the agreement as Snain to possible purchases of higher amounts than the 8 m. metric tons specified in the agreement. In this decision, I have ruled out any negotiation of a new long-term agreement. On December 29th, I postponed such nego- tiations until the Soviet Union indicates that it is prepared to permit the process of reconciliation in Poland to go forward and demonstrates this desire with deeds and not just words. My decision reinforces this objective. The Soviets should not be afforded the security of a new long-term grain agreement as long as repression continues in Poland. I lifted the grain embargo, imposed by the previous Administration, in spring of 1981 because it was not having the desired effect of seriously penalizing the USSR for its brutal invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. Instead, alternative suppliers of this widely available commodity stepped in to make up for the grain which would have been normally supplied by U.S. farmers. These developments substantially undercut the tremen- dous sacrifices of our farmers and I vowed at that time not to impose a grain embargo unilaterally unless it was part of a general cut-off of trade between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. - 2 - Our farmers therefore can be assured that they will continue to have a fair opportunity to export grain to the USSR on a cash or cash-equivalent basis. This decision today preserves the framework in which this trade occurs. Press Conference (if asked) July 28, 1982 Q: Have you decided to review the grain agreement and if so, does this conflict with your sanctions policy toward Poland? A: -- On December 29th, along with the other sanctions imposed against the Soviet Union, I postponed negotiations of a new long-term grain agreement. -- There has been no change in the situation in Poland that would warrant any change in this particular sanction. -- The existing grain agreement with the Soviet Union will therefore continue in place for another year. White House Statement August 2, 1982 77 see Robinson draft Suty agri. with Sovide as a pun. higher must 1 / Ger mty 7 facture going nan- write up the grain disin USDA Consultations vs. Negotiations 7127 Consultations are provided for under terms of existing agreement. The Secretary of Agriculture has authority to call for these consultations. Consultations were held last spring and last fall with the Soviets. According to my memorandum of July 23, 1981, the lead roll for negotiations is entrusted to the United States Trade Represent- ative. If these were negotiations, the United States Trade Representative would conduct them. We would be entering a very extensive and time-consuming process possibly working for additional commodities such as soybeans, flour or soybean meal. The term of the agreement would be multi-year. The current agreement covers only feed grains and wheat. There is a substantial distinction between a simple extension for one year with realistic limits and negotiating a whole new long-term agreement. Block negotiating regarding the the I The Secretary is directed to contact the Soviets under terms of the existing trade agreement for consultation. He is given authority to discuss our future trade relationship, to explore the possibility for an extension of the current agree- ment for another year, and consideration of amending the minimum and maximum sales to reflect more realistic updated levels. It would be reasonable to discuss the possibility of increasing the minimum level to somewhere between 12 and 15 MMT. The Secretary is authorized to consummate an extension with the appropriate amendment if mutually agreed. From: J. Block prefered guidance - 7/27/82 The Secretary is directed to contact the Soviets under terms of the existing trade agreement for consultation. He is given authority to discuss our future trade relationship, to explore the possibility for an extension of the current agree- ment for another year, and consideration of amending the minimum and maximum sales to reflect more realistic updated levels. It would be reasonable to discuss the possibility of increasing the minimum level to somewhere between 12 and 15 MMT. The Secretary is authorized to consummate an extension with the appropriate amendment if mutually agreed. CAll Block AT 11:00 A.M Fuller hAs COPY -