RESPONSE TO PD-30 - 1978/06/09

• Document Type: SPECIALCOLLECTION
• Collection: Argentina Declassification Project - The "Dirty War" (1976-83)
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 06628555
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 42
• Document Creation Date: April 3, 2019
• Document Release Date: April 12, 2019
• Publication Date: June 9, 1978

CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
NSC 3150
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WAEiiiIN GTO N D.C. 20505
June 9, 1978
The Vice President
The Secretary of State
The Secretary of Defense
The Secretary of the Treasury
The Attorney General
The Secretary of Commerce
The Director, Office of Management
and Budget
The United States Representative
to the United Nations
The Administrator, Agency for
International Development
The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
The Director of Central Intelligence
The Director, International
Communication Agency
SUBJECT: Response to PD-30
Attached for your information is a copy of the State
response to PD-30.
CONFIDENTIAL/GDS
Christine Dodson
Staff Secretary
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
April 30, 1978
CONFIDENTIAL
REPORT OF THE INTERAGENCY GROUP ON HUMAN RIGHTS
AND FOREIGN ASSISTANCE CONCERNING THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF U.S. HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIONS
IN THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Pursuant to PD/NSC-30, the Interagency Group
on Human Rights and Foreign Assistance submits this
report on the effectiveness of recent U.S. actions
in the international financial institutions (IFIs)
concerning human rights. As provided in the PD,
this report deals specifically with:
-- Congressional attitudes and prospective
legislation;
-- views of other nations as to the propriety
and legality of our actions; and
-- the effect of our actions on the advancement
of U.S. human rights objectives.
Before examining these particular subjects,
it will provide context to take an overall look at
the human rights actions the U.S. has taken in the
IFIs since January 1977 and to consider briefly
the process by which these actions have been determined.
I. Overview
In general, we have been moderate in using our
voice and vote in the IFIs in behalf of human rights..
Ofthe over 500 loans that have been voted upon In
the IFIs since January 1977, we have voted against
only 10 and abstained on only 17 on human rights
grounds. All of these loans were approved over our
objection, although in a few cases we received support
from other countries. In addition, we have sought to
defer consideration of about 20 loans pending human
rights developments in the countries in auestion7in
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
- -2-
several of these cases, the deferrals were only temporary.
That the number of loans the Interagency Group has �
recommended for approval greatly exceeds the number as
to which abstention or opposition has been recommended
results from three principal factors: (a) many proposed
recipients of IFI assistance have good or improving
human rights records; (b) a large proportion of IFI
assistance is designed to serve basic human needs; and
-
(c) we have- confined the use of our vote to instances.
of serious and continuing.violations..
The countries that applied for the loans as to which
we cast negative votes, abstained, or obtained postpone-
ments number only 13, as follows:
No Votes
Abstentions Postponed.
Argentina (3 loans) Argentina (5 loans) Argentina (2 loans,
on both of which we
subsequently abstained)
_Chile (2 loans) Benin -(2 loans) Chile (2 loans, one of
which we subsequently
voted against)
� Paraguay "(2 loans) Central African -El Salvador (1Lloan,
Empire (1 loan) which we subsequently
voted for).
South Yemen (1 loan) Ethiopia (3 loans) Korea (1 loan, on which
we subsequently ab-
stained)
Uruguay (2 loans) Guinea (1 loan) Nicaragua (5 loans,
one of which we sub-
sequently voted for)
Korea (2 loans) Paraguay (8 loans,
one of which we sub-
sequently voted against:
Philippines (3-
loans) Uruguay (2 loans,
both of which we voted
against)
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-3-
While this report pertains to our actions in the
IFIs, it is important to note that we have also taken
steps on human rights grounds with respect to bilateral
development assistance, PL 480 food aid, security assis-
tance, export licenses for commercially supplied
military equipment, Ex-Im financing, OPIC activities,
and CCC credits. In addition, of course, we have used
the full range of our diplomatic tools, including
direct diplomatic contacts, public statements, symbolic
acts, consultations with allies,.cooperation with
non-governmental organizations, and work with international
organizations. These steps have involved the 13 countries.
mentioned above, as well as others. There is usually
a variety of views within the Interagency Group on
whether the mix of our actions concerning any particular
country has been optimal.
We are committed to the proposition that it is
preferable to use positive actions "rewards") and
representations through normal diplomatic channels
rather than "sanctions" in pursuing our human rights
objectives. -Along this line, we are intensifying efforts
to direct a growing share of our bilateral economic
assistance to governments that show respect for human
rights. We are also quietly encouraging the IFI manage-
ments to channel their lending to countries with good
human rights records and to programs that serve basic
human needs. We have urged friendly nations to join us
in conveying this message to IFI managements. These
nations also consider this approach to be preferable to
invoking sanctions. The absence of universally agreed
upon criteria, the long lead time for project development,
and some resistance on the part of bank managements and
some members indicate that channeling IFI resources on
the basis of respect for human rights and meeting basic
human needs will be a long-term process, the result of
which will not be evident for some time.
While we believe that greater emphasis on "rewards"
rather than "sanctions" can lead to beneficial results,
the fact remains that, in addition to the thrust of our
human -rights policy,' we are explicitly required by
federal statutes to oppose certain grants or loans to
human rights violators.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-4--
II, Process
� Our efforts to implement this human rights_polity
and legislative requirements are the result of deliber-
ations by the Interagency Group on Human Rights and
Foreign Assistance. The Group has met regularly since
April 1977 when it was established pursuant to a NSC
directive.
, AS set forth in that directive, the Group has
been chaired by a representative of the Secretary of
.State (i.e., the 'Deputy Secretary) and has included
representatives of the Treasury Department, the
Defense Department, the NSC staff, and the Agency for.
International Development. Participants in the Group's
-deliberations have also included representatives of the
Agriculture Department, the Commerce-Department, the
Ex-Im Bank,: and OPIC. In addition, Treasury's repre�
sentatives have usually been accompanied by the U.S.
Executive Directors to the World Bank and the Inter-
American. Development Development Bank. -Thus, several agencies, each
with an interest in the subject matter, are represented
at every meeting.
-
The Group is aided signifitantly by its staff-level
working group. The working. group. screens all upcoming
bilateral and multilateral programs and loans for their
human rights implications, including whether they. would.
benefit the needy. The working. group recommends approval
of.the vast majority of the matters it reviews, either
because of the proposed recipient's favorable or improving
human rights record or because the proposed assistance
would benefit the needy. When there is disagreement on
these issues or where there is consensus that the human
rights record of a proposed recipient is so bad as to warrant
opposing or deferring the assistance in question, the
working group refers the matter for review by the Inter-
agency
Group. (The Interagency Group also has the option
of reviewing matters which the working group has recommended
for approval.).
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
- CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
Prior to each of its meetings, the Group receives
extensive agenda materials. These materials include
detailed descriptions of the loans or grants to be
considered, including consideration of whether the
proposed assistance would benefit the needy. The
agenda materials also include extensive information
on human rights conditions in the countries proposed
as recipients of assistance. In addition, other funda-
mental U.S. interests with respect to the country in
question are described since the Group pays close
'attention to the relationship of our human rights con-
cerns to other critical U.S. objectives. The agenda
materials also include a list of other U.S. or multi-
lateral assistance to the proposed recipient which is
likely to be presented for decision in the near future,
as well as a description of previous U.S. actions con-
cerning the human rights situation in the country in
question.
At the Group's meetings, each loan or grant on
the agenda is separately considered. The representa-
tive of the relevant State Department regional bureau
leads off the discussion with an assessment of our
bilateral relationship with the recipient country, of
the human rights situation there, of our human rights
and other objectives, and of the role our position
on the loan or grant under consideration might play.
In short, the.regional bureau representative sets
forth a strategy for dealing with the country in
question and suggests- tactics that would
carry out that strategy. Comments are then called
for by other participants. Typically, the discussion
will focus not only on the current situation but also
on whether there is a genuine trend toward or away
from improvements in human rights conditions.
After discussion, the Group frequently recommends
_
that the loan or grant should be approved: _
because human rights conditions in the recipient coun-
try are good or are authentically improving; because
other means can and should be used for the time being
to indicate our human rights concerns;or because the
assistance will benefit the needy. ' When appropriate,
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-6--
the Group may advise that the approval should be
accompanied by a diplomatic demarche explaining
our human rights concerns and making it clear that
we are seriously taking human rights .considerations
into account in our foreign assistance.decisions.
In. general and where possible under applicable law,
we prefer to discuss our human rights concerns '
through diplomatic channels before taking' any steps
with respect to foreign assistance.
When the human rights situation in the proposed
recipient country is poor and not improving, the
Group may recommend that the U.S...not support the
proposed assistance. This will particularly.be the
case where the assistance will not be likely to
benefit the needy. In these circumstances the
Group will frequently recommend that a diplomatic
demarche be made to the government concerned,
explaining our position and urging human rights
improvements.
- The Group stays abreast of human rights-develop-
ments in the countries receiving- U.S. foreign assistance
and has on a nuMber of occasions recOMmended Approval of
loans orprograms as to which it had previously recom-
mended opposition, abstention or deferral." �
. Needless to say, for a variety of reasons, including
the range of human rights violations, no automatic for-.
mula can be applied to decide how to vote on particular
loans to particular countries, and inevitably seeming
inconsistencies will appear. But the Group has learned
that the diversity of. cultures, the different stages -
of economic and political maturity, and the range of
fundamental U.S. interests. make it essential to treat
each country on the merits of its own situation and .
not to attempt to pursue our human rights objectives
in precisely the .same way as to all countries- Within
the limits of applicable law, we are primarily concerned
with taking steps that are most likely to promote human
rights in a. particular situation. In short, :tactics
must differ from country to country, but our goal -- to
enhance respect for human rights -- remains constant
as to all countries.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-7-
The Group is continually examining its own
procedures to determine how best to improve its
operation and effectivensss. The Group is conscious
that in systematically bringing human rights consid-
erations to bear on the range of our foreign assistance
decisions, it is performing a new function. Inevitably,
performance of this function has at times been contro-
versial, as the various participants grow accustomed to
the new situation. Nevertheless, we believe it is an
important function that must be performed if we are to
comply effectively with statutory commands and to be
true to our human rights commitments.
With respect to possible improvements in the
process, the Treasury Department believes it would be
useful to attempt to develop comprehensive human rights
strategy papers for some of the major human rights
problem countries. In Treasury's view, such papers
could analyze three key issues: our specific human
rights objectives in such countries, the relationship
between human rights objectives and other U.S. national
objectives, and the effectiveness of the various policy
instruments which can be used to further the human
rights effort. Treasury stresses the importance of
making individual decisions on whether the U.S. should
support or oppose prospective IFI loans in the context
of a comprehensive strategy and believes this can produce
more options for influencing situations well in advance
of a specific IFI vote. While agreeing on the importance
of strategies to guide particular decisions, some other
members of the Group, including the State Department,
believe that human rights situations in other countries
are so constantly in flux that written studies
quickly become outdated and are therefore not as use-
ful as the oral strategy presentation noted above.
To minimize seeming inconsistencies in our use of
sanctions in the IFI's, Treasury notes the desirability
of being more selective in opposing loans by establish-
ing a clearer set of criteria (e.g., confined to tights
of the person) for invoking those sanctions andfor
excepting loans that meet basic human needs, and by
limiting the use of our opposition to clear-cut
situations of gross violations where the U.S. is most
likely to be supported by other member governments.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-8-
In the-State Department's view, the criteria governing- .
decisions to abstain on or vote against IFI loans on
human rights grounds are those set forth in the statute
and they must be applied in a manner that takes into
account the differing circumstances of, and our multiple
interests with respect to, individual countries. (It_
should be noted that in the case of each abstention or
no vote there were significant violations of the rights
of the-person in the proposed. recipient country.) As for
the criteria for defining loans that serve basic human
needs,-. they are being evolved-on a case-by-case basis, ,
in light of the legislative history of the relevant-
statutory provision concerning basic human needs--With
respect to limiting the use of- sanctions to certain countries,
the State Department believes there can be little doubt
that the governments of the Countries,listed above- (p.2)
are (or were at ths time of ths vote). engaged in .serious
violations of-human- rights, some in greater degree than
others. �
Finally -with respect to the Group's- process, it
has become increasingly clear that when a- convincing.-
case.is made that-a given loan or project will direatly.
benefit the needy by serving their basic needs, assistance
should be approved-in all but the rarest instances.-- Since
we consider each loan and project on its merits, we see. ..
no need to exclude the possibility that extraordinary
circumstances-might warrant the-delay or possible disapproval
of 'a basic human needs loan, but this. would clearly be the
exceptional case. 'At the same time, it is essential that
other countries understand (and we are.so advising them) -
that our approval of basic human needs loans is not an
expression of approval forthe human rights practices-;-of- - -
-the recipient-government.
III. Congressional Attitudes and Prosoective Human
Rights Legislation.
There is broad support in Congress for giving human
rights concerns a high priority in our foreign policy. A. _
growing coalition of liberals and. conservatives is prepared
-to push new human rights.initiatives,. The liberals have a
concern for human rights and basically support the IFIs and
foreign aid. Some of the conservatives, while also concerned
about human rights, are essentially anti-IFI and anti-foreign
aid and many see human rights legislation as an indirect
means of reducing aid.
There-are no signs that Congress is having second thoughts
about the Harkin Amendment which requires that the U.S. oppose
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-9-
IFI loans to governments engaged in a consistent pattern
of gross violations of internationally recognized human
rights, unless such assistance is directed specifically
to programs which serve the basic human needs of the citizens
of such country.
At the same time, there has been some confusion in
Congress as to the Administration's efforts to carry out
this legislation and as to the Administration's human rights
policy generally. A common criticism on the Hill is that the
Administration has been inconsistent in applying its human
rights policy, giving harsher treatment to small countries
where we have little security or economic interests, while -
applying a different standard to those countries which are
important to us. Another argument heard on the Hill is that
our human rights policy is jeopardizing "more important U.S.
interests." Some members have argued that moral .suasion and
arousal of world opinion are more effective in achieving
human rights progress than "sanctions," including opposition
to IFI loans. Others are troubled about how our human rights
policy is applied to a particular country or region, even
though they support its application elsewhere. 14 connection.
with.these criticisms, many questions have been raised as to
the mandate and functions of the Interagency Group on Human
Rights and Foreign Assistance.
In response to this situation, we have in recent weeks
made a concerted effort to explain our human rights actions
more fully to the Congress. We have sent to large numbers Of
interested congressmen and senators a detailed memorandum
on the Interagency Group. This memorandum sets forth the
statutory fremework within which the Group operates, explains
the mandate and composition of the Group, and describes the
Group's proceedings. Congressman Zablocki has had this memo-
randum printed in the Congressional Record and, in general,
we have had a very favorable response to it. In addition,
we have begun a series of consultations with Congressmen
particularly interested in human rights issues. In this connec-
tion, we have arranged small breakfasts and lundheons where
relevant human rights issues, including our actions in the IFIs,
can be fully discussed.
In our consultations with Congress, we have explained
that. in view of the diverse circumstances of the countries
proposed as recipients of assistance -- as well as the
diversity of our foreign policy interests -- it is
inevitable that we will pursue our human. rights
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-10-
objectives in somewhat different ways as to different
countries. As for the claim that we have been too
prone to use "sanctions," we have explained the facts
set forth above which show that we have been quite
moderate in the use of "sanctions." With respect to
objections from Congress about our treatment of par-
ticular countries, we have made a special effort to
explain our rationale and actions to the members who
have raised a question. While it would be inaccurate
to say that our explanations are always considered
satisfactory, it has been our experience that a sincere
effort to explain our position fully has led to increased
understanding.
� Ccncern has also been expressed in Congress about
the Administration's efforts to block certain restrictive
human rights amendments. Some members feel the Admin- - �
istration's efforts have been too late; and poorly:coordi-
nated. Several members have indicated
that they do not plan in the future to support the
Administration's .efforts to. block popular human rights
legislation since they think those efforts are likely.
to be. futile. .We have been advised by one congressman
Who is, a strong supporter of our human rights initiatives
that it would be preferable for the Administration to
deal with.proposed human -rights amendments while bills
are still in committee or in conference rather than
when they reach the floor. , He argues .that once the �
bills- reach the floor, it is much more difficult to �
defeat' an amendment. Thus, he has urged that the -
Administration should .let human rights supporters, in
Congress know as soon as possible which amendments or
Darts of amendments the Administration can and cannot
live with. we believe this is sound advice and are
taking steps to implement it to the degree feasible: It
must be noted, however, that in a variety of instances'
in the past we have made our views clear in committee --
and worked'out desirable' languagethere -- only to have
such understandings rendered moot by floor revisions.
We have been advised that a great many human rights
amendments may be offered this year in committee or on
the floor. .Thus far, however, there have been only a
few proposed amendments and initiatives as set forth below.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-11-
Some of them pertain to the IFIs; others to other
forms of U.S. assistance:
-- The Young Bill (H.R. 11098): On April 5
Congressman Bill Young of Florida, the ranking minority
member of the Foreign Operations Subcommittee of the
House Appropriations Committee, introduced a bill
requiring that the U.S. seek to modify the charter
of the IFIs to require that each institution establish
a human rights standard to be considered in connection
with every application for assistance. The bill would
also require the President to report to Congress within
three months actions taken to gain acceptance of such
amendments of the IFI charters. It is not clear how much
support this proposal will receive in Congress. On
the merits of the proposal, we believe any such effort
to amend the IFI charters would arouse enormous �
controversy within the institutions and generate great
bitterness towards the U.S. Under present arrange-
ments, U.S. efforts tobring human rights considerations
to bear in the IFIs, while resented by several IFI
.members, are not being actively opposed, and in some
instances they are being actively supported by like-
minded governments. If, however, the U.S. takes the
major step of seeking an amendment in the IFI charters,
what is now taCit opposition from some governments
would likely ,become vigorous and sustained opposition
that could have a deleterious effect on the functioning
of the institutions. The fact that some IFI members
would =pose any such effort is not dispositive. But
since it is not apparent that such charter revisions
are necessary in order to take human rights actions
in the IFIs, there would appear to be no countervailing
benefit in the course the Young. bill requires. --
_
-- Human Rights Reports: We have reason to believe
that several conservative members of Congress will
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-12-
introduce legislation requiring that the Administration
submit reports on human rights conditions in-a11
countries that receive IFI loans (currently we are
required to submit such reports on countries that
receive bilateral U.S. economic and military assistance).
Approximately 50 additional reports would be required.
Some countries, especially Brazil, would be likely
to react quite negatively to our submission of such
a report. The Administration has opposed _this
legislation. _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ .
Harkin Amendment: Witteveen Facility-. Over.
Administration opposition, theJiouse passed on
February 23 by a voice vote a Harkin amendment. to -
the Bretton Woods Agreement Act. The amendment would
require the U.S. Executive Director of the IMF to. "
initiate consultations to encourage the IMF to formulate
stabilization programs which foster investment and
employment, especially where designed to meet basic
human needs. -The U.S. Executive- Director would Also be
required to take all' possible steps to see that the -
Witteveen Facility does not contribute to the.depri-
vation of basic human needs and. the violation of basic,
human rights and to oppose any loans that would contri-
bute to such deprivations or violations.- Finally, the
Secretary of the Treasury would be required to prepare
an annual report evaluating the effects of the Witteveen
Facility on the ability of the poor to obtain (a) an
adequate supply of food, (b) shelter and:clothing, (c)
public.services, including health care,. education, clean'
water, energy.. resources and transportation; and (d)
productive employment that provides a reasonable and
adequate wage� -
�
The Senate version of this legislation has been
reported by the SFRC and the Committee on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs. The bill includes no human
rights provisions at 'present, although a Harkin-type
amendment could be added on the floor. State and
Treasury are currently reviewing what position to take
if such an amendment is introduced, as well as what
position to take in conference.
CONFIDENTIAL .
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-13-
-- Harkin Amendment: OPIC. On February 23, 1978,
the House added a Harkin amendment to the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) Act of 1977,
by a vote of 191 to 76. The report, including the
entire Harkin amendment, was adopted by the Senate
on April 5 and by the House on April 11. The amended
OPIC legislation was signed by the President on
April 24.
The principal effect of the Harkin amendment
is to apply Section 116 of the Foreign Assistance
Act to OPIC. Section 116 requires that no assistance
be provided to any country which engages in a consistent
pattern of gross violations of internationally recog-
nized human rights, unless the assistance would directly
benefit the needy. The amendment also calls for OPIC
to take into account in the conduct of its programs
in any country (in consultation with the Secretary of
State) all available information about the observance
and respect of human rights in such countries. Finally,
the amendment establishes the following new. reporting
requirements. :First, OPIC must include a description
of any project for which it .has refused to provide
insurance, reinsurance, guarantee, financing or .
financial support because of the human rights provisions
of the amendment. Second,OPIC must include a description
of any project for which it has approved such assistance
due to a determination that the project either meets
basic human needs or because the President has decided
that approval is in the national security 'interest of
the-United States.
-- Institute for International Human Rights.
Congressmen Dante Fascell and
Donald Fraser have introduced legislation establishing
an independent federal agency -- the Institute for Inter-
_ . _ _
national Human Rights. The institute would
primarily provide financial and other assistance to
private individuals or groups working to promote human
rights, including individuals or groups in foreign
countries. Specifically, the institute would provide
financial support for a number of non-governmental
organizations and individuals for such purposes as
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-14-
conducting conferences, publishing books and articles,
carrying out research and studies, and supporting
legal defense for victims of political persecution.
The bill is expected to receive wide .support; The
Administration has expressed the view that such an
institute, if carefully structured, .could make a .
valuable contribution to efforts on behalf of human
rights but that certain questions- must be seriously
addressed in Considering creation of such. an entity.
-- Humphrey Bill. The bill to establish the
International Development Cooperation Administration
.(or Humphrey Bill) as introduced by Senator Sparkman
on _January 30, 1978, includes with no significant -
changes the hamaa:rights provisions.of Section 116 of
the existing Foreign Assistance Act (i.e., no aid to
gross and consistent violators unless it would benefit
the needy). The human rights, provisions in the bill
are intended to apply to all forms of foreign assis-
tance covered.by the bill. While the Administration
will be making a variety of proposals and suggestions
related to the purposes of the Humphrey Bill, it does
not presently appear that these will pertain to the
billy-s human rights provisions.
-- The Tsongas Amendment to the Ex-Im Reauthori-
zation.Bill. On April 13, the International
Trade Subcommittee of the House Banking Committee adopted
the Tsongas Amendment-to-the Ex-Im.Bank Reauthorization -
Bill. The operative language of the amendment reads:
"In no event .shall the bank guarantee, insure,
or extend credit or participate in any
� extension of credit to the Republic of South'
Africa unless and until the President determines
that significant progress toward majority rule
has been made in the Republic of South Africa
and transmits to the Congress a statement
describing and explaining the determination."
It is not unlikely that the amendment will be
accepted by the full Committee and ultimately on the
House floor. The Administration, which already has the -
authority to do what the Tsongas amendment directs, opposed
the amendment on foreign policy flexibility grounds.
What position the Administration should now take is under
review.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
- 15 -
IV. Views of Other Nations on the Propriety
and Legality of our Actions
Other nations have commented on U.S. human rights
actions in the IFIs during normal diplomatic contacts,
as well as during special consultations on this issue
that we have conducted with the governments of Canada,
the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany,
Sweden, Denmark, France, Belgium, Japan, Australia, and
India, and with the European Commission.We hope to have
consultations of this kind in the near future with
other governments, including Senegal, Kenya, Venezuela,
Costa Rica, and others.)
IFI donors have reiterated several themes when
discussing human rights and the IFIs with us. There
is agreement among those consulted thus far that
human rights concerns should be taken into account
in the IFIs. They place the Same high value on human
rights as we do. With different foreign policy agendas,
however, no two countries will ,always make the same
choices between human rights and other pressing concerns.
There is also agreement that the manner in which
human rights concerns are taken into account in the
IFIs should not endanger the integrity or viability:
of the institutions. There is concern that unless the
human rights issue is handled carefully, it could cause
the IFIs to become highly politicized and to lose
their effectiveness in promoting development.
There is also concern that human rights not become
a North/South issue. Towards this end, we and other
donors agree that it would be desirable to have
consultations with LDCs such as those we have held
with the donor countries. As noted above, we plan to
have consultations on this subject with certain LDC's
in the near future. Other donors have also suggested
that discussions on human rights among executive
directors in the IFIs should be held outside of the IFI
board meetings in order to minimize confrontations.
Several countries with whom we have consulted
noted the desirability of not letting the IFIs become
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
- 16 -
-the "cutting edge" of human right policy. Canada,
the UK and the FRG cited the need for actions in the
IFIs to be consistent with a country's bilateral
assistance program, and France pointed to advantages
of using bilateral contacts first. German officials
.noted the results of pursuing human rights issues
in such fora as the UN, the Council of Europe,and CSCE.
. Some other governments said there may appear to
be inconsistencies in their actions in the IFIs because
Of the varying interests they have in their relations
from country to country. Some of the governments noted'
that actions toward different countries which may
appear to be inconsistent if only human rights conditions
in the countries are compared, may actually be
consistent if a broader spectrum of foreign policy
-interests is donsidered.
The more narrow legal issue Of whether IFI
charters allow human rights to be taken into account
in the IFIs has been raised both in direct consultations
and in other ways.* While donor.countries with whom we
have consulted often raised the issue,. it seems clear
to us that the broad concerns outlined above--rather
than questions of legal interpretation--would be the
underlying reasons why other countries might curtail...
the extent to which they would take human rights
concerns into account in the IFIs.
The Charter of the IBRD provides in pertinent part
that the "Bank, its officers and employees should not
interfere in the political affairs of any member, nor
shall they be influenced in their decisions by the
political character of... [the recipient government].
Only economic considerations should be relevant to
their decisions..." The charters of the other IFIs
contain comparable provisions.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
'CONFIDENTIAL
- 17 -
On the merits of the legal issue, they appeared to
share our view that human rights concerns can
legitimately be taken into account because economic
development necessarily includes questions of equity,
welfare and social justice. Consulted donors appeared
to be concerned with the legal issue mainly because
affected LDCs might seize upon it.
In general, it is still too early to know
whether other donors will significantly increase
the relative weight they accord to human rights
considerations in the IFIs. Some members of the
Interagency Group believe there is cause for opti-
mism on this issue; others are not optimistic.
We have seen some evidence that some LDCs con-
sider our human rights initiatives in the IFIs to be both
improper and illegal. They believe it is improper be-
cause it introduces a new and extraneous issue which
could lead to confrontation as well as jeopardize
country program levels. They argue that introducing
human rights concerns violates IFI charters and thus
is illegal. They claim the issue threathens the
basic integrity and apolitical character of the IFIs,
making it difficult to discuss development issues
rationally and without posturing between donors and
recipients. The issue has generated considerable con-
troversy within the institutions, including accusations
that the U.S. is politicizing them. Korea and the
Philippines have considered sponsoring a "motion of
regret" in the ADB Board over U.S. human rights initia-
tives in that bank. Nigeria and India have questioned
the use of IFIs as a tool to bring about human rights
improvements. Argentina may seek a legal opinion from
the IDB on whether charter provisions prohibiting poli-
ticization are violated by our human rights initiatives.
There have been indications that other LDCs may take
similar steps.
While we believe it is legitimate to bring human
rights considerations to bear in the IFIs, the reaction
of various LDCs makes it clear that we must handle the
issue with great--Treasury would say greater-- sensitivity
to ensure we do not alter the apolitical characters of
the IFIs and impede their effectiveness in promoting
development. Towards this end, we think it desirable
to the extent feasible to
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-18--
Implement our policies discreetly by working behind
the scenes rather than generating open confrontation
in the bank boards. Thus, in opposing a loan because
of human rights violations, we have been making our
reasons clear beforehand to the government of the
borrowing country and its executive director,� as well
as to other governments with whom we are consulting,
but have generally refrained from mentioning human
rights at the board meetings.
To increase the likelihood that other countries
will support ns, we will be intensifying our efforts
to consult with them on how to reflect human rights
considerations in long-term bank lending programs in
ways which would reduce the number of cases where an
opposition vote of the U.S. would be required. We
will also help to achieve this goal by relying
increasingly on "rewards" rather than "sanctions"
in furthering our human rights objectives in the IFIs
over the longer term.
. Some LDC's also have argued that donor emphasis
in the IFIs and elsewhere on .human rights- and basic
hilmanneeds is, in actuality, both moral imperialism
and an excuse for reducing aid. Frequently LDC.'s
have claimed that human rights initiatives stress.
observance of "Western-style" human rights, i.e.,
the rights of the individual, and political rights.
They claim this ignores basic economic rights, such as
the right to be adequately clothed, fed and housed, the
right 'toeducation and to adequate medical: care, etc.
We believe our human rights initiatives do not
warrant this criticism. We have repeatedly taken the
position that our, human rights policy seeks to promote
economic and social rights as well as rights of the
person and civil and political liberties.. Our support
of bilateral and multilateral assistance .for the needy..
in countries with questionable human rights records
demonstrates the importance we attach to economic and
social rights. -
Some LDC's have argued that the emphasis of our
assistance programs on basic human needs is designed
to impede Third World industrial development. To the
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-19-
extent our human rights policies stress basic human
-needs assistance, they attract the same criticism.
Needless to say, what underlies our approach is not
a desire to forestall economic competition from LDCs,
but rather a conviction that a stronger emphasis on
basic human needs will enhance our effectiveness in
promoting overall economic development.
V. The Effect of Our Actions on the Advancement of
U.S. Human Rights Objectives.
The United States has used a variety of policy
tools to implement its human rights policy. The use -
of our "voice and vote" in the multilateral develop-
ment institutions is only one of these tools, but one
which, in certain circumstances, has been influential.
IFI-related actions have normally been taken in conjunction
with or subsequent to other forms of action or repre-
sentation. Thus, actions in the IFIs have not become
the "cutting edge" of our human rights policy.
Since, as noted above, our concept of human rights
encompasses economic and social rights, we have
in most instances continued to support IFI loans to
countries with serious human rights problems when the loans
are directed at meeting the basic human needs of the
poor; at the same time, we have opposed loans to such
countries for large capital and infrastructure projects.
We have explained this distinction to recipient governments.
In our representations we have emphasized our belief
that policies which foster human rights contribute positively
to economic and social development.
As for the economic impact of our actions in the
IFIs, no loan has failed to be approved because of our
opposition, although efforts described above to encourage
other donor support may lead to the actual disapproval
of loans. -However 7 when countries have withdrawn or
delayed applications for loans in anticipation of U.S.
opposition, there has been a direct economic impact.
. (The value of all loans that have been postponed is .
approximately $385 million.Of_that.amount, _loans totaling
approximately $250 million were subsequently approved by the
IFIs.) There has also been an economic effect in those
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
. CONFIDENTIAL
-20--
few instances in which countries, anticipating U.S.
opposition to a proposed loan, have switched_the
loans from the Inter-American Development Bank's
"soft lending window" (i.e., the Fund for Special '
Operations), where the U.S. has veto power over loans,
to the bank's "hard lending window," where interest
rates are higher and maturities shorter. U.S. actions
In the 'Has on human rights may also in certain cases
affect a country's credit-worthiness in the eyes of
commercial lenders.
A. our actions in the IFIs are almost always
accompanied by other actions or representations, a. .
direct relationship cannot be shown between our actions
in the IFIs and specific human rights developments in
other countries. More basically,. we have generally tried
to avoid linking-particular actions on .our part-- in .
the IFIs or in any other context to particular 'human
rights improvements in the recipient country. This kind
of quid pro quo approach to human rights, while it has
a superficial appeal, would-in our judgment tend to
-permit and perhaps even encourage other countries to .
engage in cosmetic human rights changes designed to
fetch a.particularresponse from us._ If, for example,
we made it plain to a Country that we Would support IFI
loans if a substantial number ofpolitical prisoners
were released; it is possible that the country would
detain.prisoners for the purposeof subsequently releasing.
them in order to satisfy the Condition we had laid down
This type of manipulation is an.inherent risk of a .
quid pro quo approach
This is not to say, however, that because we have
resisted the notion of trading specific actions on our
part for specific human rights improvements elsewhere,
any particular actions on our part can fairly be charac-
terized as ineffective. It is necessary to consider all
the steps we have taken to 'promote human rights. We think
it is clear that the totality of our actions -- including -
our actions in the IFIs -- has increased the costs of
repression and helped to create an atmosphere in which
human rights progress is more likely to occur. Our actions
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-21-
have brought about a very substantial increase in
world awareness of human rights issues. This new
consciousness not only helps curb existing human rights
abuses; it also acts as a deterrent to new violations.
While it is not possible to say that any particular
step we have taken has led to any Particular result,
it is probably the case that if we appeared to be
reluctant to bring human rights considerations to bear
in a prominent context -- such as the IFIs -- we would
call into serious question the depth of our human rights
commitment. Thus, if we are going to continue to be
effective in raising human rights consciousness and
nurturing an atmosphere in which human rights progress
is more likely to occur, it is important that we continue
to bring human rights considerations to bear in a
conscientious, coherent way on all of our bilateral and
multilateral assistance programs.
Even though no one-to-one relationship can be
shown between our actions in the IFIs and specific
human rights developments, it is useful to consider
developments in each country as to which we have taken
some IFI-related: actions on human rights grounds. A
country-by-country synopsis is included in Appendix A.
While improvements, are noted for most of the countries
in question, human rights problems persist in all of
the countries.
With respect to possible means of enhancing' our
effectiveness, Treasury believes there should be a
presumption that in the IFIs we will limit the use of
sanctions to promotion of the "first group" of rights,
i.e., rights of the person. In Treasury's view this
approach will be more likely to win support from other
governments, since they will not see themselves called
upon in a multilateral context to pass judgment on the
political organization and structure of another government.
With such added support, Treasury believes this approach
could be more effective in bringing about human rights
improvements in the recipient country. It will also
be more effective, in Treasury's view, because violations
of rights of the person can be more readily curtailed than
other types of human rights violations.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-2 2-
The State Department believes that to focus in
the IFIs solely on violations of rights of the person
would put too narrow a construction on the statutory
language-- It would also unduly downgrade the gravity
of violations of economic and social rights and of
political and civil rights. PD-3D makes it clear
that all three categories of rights are the subject -
of. our human rights policy. To downgrade these -
violations in the IFIs but not in other multilateral
contexts would not be understood, in State's view.
State believes other countries are willing to support
human rights policy that addresses all three groups.
In addition, State believes it is not possible to
make meaningful generalizations about whether,-partic-
ular types of human rights violations are more
readily remediable than others. In some cases; for
example, it may be that violations of political and
-civil rights can be stopped more expeditiously than
violations of rights of the person; in other cases,
the reverse may be. true.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Appendix A
Synopsis of IFI-Related Human Riohts Actions by Country
Country Action Taken Amount Involved
Afghanistan � diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs
1 approval $.12
The U.S. made general human rights representations
to the government of this extremely poor and traditional
country. Sporadic reports of torture and arbitrary
arrest and imprisonment resulted in a decision to inform
the Afghanistan Government that the U.S. takes human
rights factors into account in its decisions on whether
to support IFI loans. The GOA has carried through with
plans to promulgate a new penal code which contains
human rights guarantees that supplement the traditional
.mixture of Islamic jurisprudence and custom.
Country
Action Taken Amount Involved1/
Argentina 2 loans temporarily
postponed $109
� 3 no votes $185
5 abstentions $228
1 approval $ 83
The Argentines have been particularly sensitive
to our human rights actions in the IFIs. They have
pointed to improvements in their human rights situation
as an argument for our changing from a no vote to an
abstention in the IFIs, and they expressed appreciation
when we took this course last February with respect to
two IFI loans. The recent improvements which they and
we have noted. are: the release of some prisoners, the
listing of the names of some 3,500 persons being held
1/ Amounts in millions; period covered is May 1,
1977-April 30, 1978.
.CONFIDENTIAL
'GDS
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-2-
under executive detention, the acknowledgement that
over 3,600 people fall into this category, and the
implementation�although still on a very limited scale--
of the right of such detainees to seek the of.
exile. Despite these minimal improvements, disappear-
ances,-arbitrary arrests, prolonged detention without
trial, torture and other violations continue to occur..
Our actions in the IFIs have been complemented by..
frank discussions of human rights concerns in the
course of visits by the Secretary and. three Assistant
Secretaries of State (including the AssistantSecretary
'for Human Rights), by the termination, of sedurity
assistance and disapproval of many licenses for, the �
export of munitions list and other arms related items
to Argentina.
At our behest the Argentines temporarily delayed
two large IFI loans, which they subsequently reintroduced
and on which the U.S. abstained.--
Country 'Action Taken -Amount Involved �
Bangladesh diplomatic retesentation on human
rights and the IFIs
� 11 approvals $258- .
The U.S. has made general human rights represen-
tations to .this extremely poor country, including.
explaining that our policy calls for taking human
rights factors into account in decisions on whether to
support IFI loans. .The approval of some commercial'
arms export licenses for civil law, enforcement purposes
has also been delayed. Human rights concerns centered
on the rather large number of political, prisoners and'
lack of right of appeal for Military personnel convicted
by military courts for involvement in mutiny and a coup
attempt, some of whom were sentenced to death and
executed. While the government continues to hold some.
political prisoners, it has released large numbers,
many in the last half of 1977 It is possible that
the high rate of release was due in part to our repre-
sentations and actions. In addition to representations,
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-3--
we negotiated inclusion of language in our FY '78
PL 480, Title I agreement to ensure compliance with
the legislative requirement that the commodities provided
to countries with serious human rights problems, or
the proceeds from the sale of the commodities, should
directly benefit the needy.
Country
Benin
Action Taken
2 abstentions
3 approvals
Amount Involved
' $ 7-2
$ 24.5
U.S. concern for human rights conditions in Benin
centered on arbitrary arrests, prolonged detentions with-
out trial and abusive treatment of detainees. We expressed
our concerns to the GOB in general terms in early 1977,
and in May 1977 it was determined to underscore these
representations by abstaining on two IFI loans to Benin,
The GOB did not seem to be aware of the significance of
such action. In the meantime, however, arbitrary arrests
and mistreatment of detainees appear to have ceased* This
may be due in part to our actions and/or may reflect
the current period of political calm.
Country
Bolivia
Action Taken. -Amount Involved
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs
10 approvals $180.6
Bolivia is a very poor country and is extremely
sensitive to changes which could affect development aid
flows. The U.S. has made representations to the GOB
about human rights problems in conjunction with our
continued support of bilateral assistance programs and
IFI assistance. The Assistant Secretary for Human Rights
visited Bolivia and raised human rights concerns. Since
these representations were made, and in response to
mounting internal pressures, the Bolivian Government has
taken several major steps to improve human rights conditions.
CONFIDENTIAL �
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
These include- the release of .political prisoners,
permission for political exiles to return freply,
Provisions for the rehiring of workers fired for poli-
tical or trade union activity, the end of internal
exile, permission for trade unions and political
parties to operate freely, and a promise of free
elections in 1978.
The U.S. has also conditioned the sale of arms to
the customs police on assurances that they will not be
used for internal security purposes. We are continuing
to vote for loans to Bolivia in the IFIs; we are also
continuing AID and PL 480 assistance.
Country
Brazil
Action Taken 'Amount InvoIved
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs
12 approvals $536.7
The Brazilians do not accept that other governments
have a.right to express concern about human rights-
conditions-in Brazil, through public pronouncements
or action in the IFIs, or in other ways. Nevertheless, ,
since 1974 when-human rights conditions. in-Brazil became
a prominent international issue as well-as.a major issue
in U.S-/Brazilian relations, the GOB, has taken steps to.
halt some of the abuses of the rightsof the person. The
torture of political prisoners- has.largely.ceased;. police
abuse of common criminals continues. 'In a few recent
cases' of alleged mistreatment of' criminal suspects, the
accused perpetrators have been suspended pending � -
investigation of the charges. Significant restrictions
on political activities remain. The press continues to
Impose Self-censorship, but the-de facto, guidelines
have been considerably liberalized.
Brazil renounced FMS financing for FY '78 on the
grounds that U.S. linkage of human rights and security
assistance is an unwarranted interference in its internal
affairs. We have not requested FMS for FY 1-19 for Brazil..
Approval of some export licenses for both commercial arms
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
� CONFIDENTIAL
-5-
and munitions list items has been delayed or denied.
Secretary Vance discussed human rights concerns with
Foreign Minister Silveira several items in 1977 and with
President Geisel as well during his visit in late 1977.
President Carter also discussed human rights issues with
President Geisel during his March visit to Brazil.
Country
Central African
Empire
Action Taken
1 abstention
1 approval
Amount Involved
$ 6.3
$ 6.4
In addition to our IFI actions, we made diplomatic
representations on human rights concerns, canceled new
bilateral AID programs, and took the symbolic step
of not sending a special delegation to the Emperor's
coronation in 1977. In the wake to these steps, the
Emperor and other high-ranking CAE officials have stated
their understanding of U.S. human rights policy and
their desire to be responsive to it in the interest of
improving bilateral relations. Several favorable
developments, including planning for national assembly
elections, may indicate a positve trend, but problems
remain.
Country
Chile
Action Taken Amount Involved
2 no votes $ 39
2 loans postponed $ 36,5
Our opposition--and that of certain other countries--
to IFI loans to Chile has had little visible effect upon
the Chilean Government but presumably is one factor
which it takes into consideration in its policy for-
mulation. That Government has taken a defiant stance
in reaction to such international pressures and has
channeled its borrowing from official sources to the
private, predominantly U.S., capital market.
The U.S. has stopped (except for certain previously
sold or obligated items) all security assistance, military
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
trainingi�commercial arms sales, Export-Import Bank
direct loans, and bilateral development assistance. We
have co-sponsored resolutions in the United Nations
criticizing Chile on. human rights grounds and made
innumerable diplomatic dematches.
Country
Action Taken . ' AmOUn.t.Involved-'
El Salvador I loan temporarily $ 90.4
postponed
4 approvals .$112,1
In response to a U.S. suggestion coupled with U.S,
expressions of concern about the human rights situation
in El Salvador, a $90 million IDB hydroelectric' loan -
with an FSO component was postponed at the request of
the GOES for several months. It was plated before the
bank board for a vote after El Salvador took some
positiveihuMan rights measures, including lifting the'
state of siege and publicly Providing security to_Jesuits
threatened by rightest extremists. sOther positive steps
included a government announcement that political exiles
would be.allowed.to_return, restraint in dealing. with .
some acts of violence and demonstrations, and the passage
of a .rural tax, law which included provisions benefitting
low-income sectors. In light of these improvements the
U.S.. supported the loan when it was re-introduced. Since
that time, we have received some reports of arbitrary- .
arrests, continued detention of political prisoners,
and mistreatment of detainees. The GOES has denied that
it continues to hold political prisoners. We will be
evaluating such reports in determining our position on
future IFI loans proposed for El Salvador.
In addition to steps in the IFIs, the U.S. did not
request FMS financing for FY '79 in the wake of El Salvador's
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-7--
having renounced FMS financing for FY '78 on the grounds
that a Congressional hearing on the Salvadoran
presidential election of 1977 constituted interference
in its internal political process and an infringement
of El Salvador's sovereignty. Export licenses for �
both commercial and munitions list items. for police
recipients have been denied or in some instances their
issuance has been delayed. In addition, the Assistant
Secretary of State for Human Rights has visited El Salvador
and made human rights representations to its leaders.
Country Action Taken Amount Involved �
Ethiopia 3 abstentions* $ 81
2 approvals $ 13
The general human rights situation in Ethiopia is
deplorable, although the GOE has gone to considerable
lenghts to improve the economic welfare of the Ethiopian
people. Our decision to abstain on two basic human needs
loans to Ethiopia reflected a belief that it was necessary
to send the Ethiopian Government a clear and strong
signal of our concern without actively opposing such loans.
The U.S. has also cut off all security assistance and is
denying all commercial arms and munitions list export
license applications.
Country
Guinea
Action Taken
1 abstention
no approvals
Amount Involved
$ 5,5
At our suggestion, the Guineans invited and the
International Commission of the Red Cross recently sent
a delegate to Conakry to discuss prison conditions
and other human rights issues. President Toure last
year amnestied 300 prisoners. Problems of political
* One of these abstentions was based on expropriation
grounds as well as human rights concerns.
CONFIDENT/AL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 006628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-8-
detention and arbitrary arrest persist.
Our abstention on the IFI loan was significant
given the Guinean Government's interest in obtaining
economic assistance and investment from the West. Our
action in the IFIs has been complemented by high level
demarches, denial of -a request to buy coastal patrol
boats and denial of a request for increased-PLr480,
Title I assistance. (We did allocate a PL 480, Title II
program to Guinea because of drought problems.)
Country Action Taken Amount Involved
Indonesia diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs
14 approvals $512.5
Indonesia is one of the world's.major recipients
of -IFI assistance and depends on this aid to help meet.
problems of massive poverty and over-population. In
accordance with a timetable announced in December, 1976,
Indonesia released 10,000 political prisoners in 1977. -
According to the Indonesian Government, approximately
20,000 prisoners,- arrested over ten years ago for political
-insurgency; remain in detention without 'trial. Indonesia
has said it will release. another 10,000 this year and will
release ortry the remainder before the end of 1979. An
Impasse On continuation of ICRC visits has been overcome,
and ICRC teams are free to visit all detention centers as
well as detainees who have been released. Some Indonesian
officials have told us that they are considering accelerating
the schedule for prisoner releases. Some released detainees
and human rights leaders have attributed GOI actions in
this field in part to the influence of our policies.
'U.S. human rights initiatives in Indonesia have
Included: frequent discussions of human rights matters .
by our Ambassador and other USG officials, including a visit
to Indonesia by Assistant Secretary berian; the delay or
denial of commercial arms and munitions list export licenses
for equipment intended for civil law enforcement purposes;
and negotiation of agreed language in connection with the
FY '78 PL 480, Title I agreement to ensure compliance with
the legislative requirement that commodities provided to
countries with serious human rights problems, or the pro-
ceeds from the sale of thecommodities, must be used to
benefit the needy.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-9-
Country Action Taken Amount Involved
Korea 1 loan temporarily $ 0.16
postponed
2 abstentions $ 1.9
10 approvals $447.5
The Koreans have released all but one of the Myong
Dong prisoners and relaxed press censorship, The ROKG
handled student protests in October, 1977 and the
publication of manifestos in February and March, 1978
with restraint. These steps were almost certainly
related to U.S. human rights efforts, including U.S,
negative actions against two IFI loans. On the other
hand, the machinery which has enabled the regime to use
repressive tactics' against political opponents remains
intact.
The U.S. has made representations on human rights
issues in the course of several high level visits, In
addition, the FY '78, PL 480, Title I agreement will -
be responsive to legislative requirements concerning --
food aid to countries with human rights problems (i.e..
assurances that the food or the proceeds
_
from its sale will benefitthe needy). Because of
U.S. national security interests, security assistance
to Korea has not been affected by human rights consi-
derations. However, approval of some export licenses,
for both commercial and munitions list items for civil
law enforcement purposes has been delayed,
The Koreans temporarily withdrew one loan for
$162,000 on which the U.S, abstained when it was sub-
sequently reintroduced.
Country -Action Taken 'AMOuht involved
Malawi
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFis
3 approvals $ 23.1
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-10-
The U.S. has made general human rights representations,
including explaining that our police includes taking
human rights factors into account in our decisions on
whether to support IFI assistance. Human rights concerns
were raised with Malawi because of extensive arbitrary
arrests and detentions. Subsequent to our representations,
the Government of Malawi released almost all of those -
detained. While releases had .begun in Decemberof l976
U.S- action was probably influential in encouraging
the GOM to continue on this course of action.:
Col_2.1L-
Nepal-
Action Taken Amount Involved
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs
3 approvals $ 26,7
The U.S. has made general human rights representations,
including explaining that our policy includes taking
human rights factors into account in our decision on
whether to support IFI assistance. Human rights concerns
have centered on the existence of some political prisoners.
The Nepalese Government has taken steps to process and
release the bulk of these prisoners, although some
remain under detention.
Country-. -Action Taken. 'Amo-unt involved
Nicaragua- 3 loans postponed $ 56,3
4 approvals- $. 33,1
The situation in Nicaragua is currently in a state
of flux due to an outbreak of internal dissent that began
in January following the assassination of Pedro Chammoro,
President Somoza's Chief political opponent. Prior to
this event, human rights Improvements were noted. In
September 1977 President Somoza lifted the state of
siege, thereby removing press censorship, and markedly
reduced the more serious abuses of the Guard, especially
in the rural areas. Reports of abuse by the Guard in
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-11-
the wake of recent demonstrations and guerrilla attacks,
accounts of the continued existence of political
Prisoners, and widespread corruption remain causes of
concern. The U.S, has withheld approval of some AID
loans for several months (some of which were recently
approved), signed but not yet provided any funds under
the FY '77 FMS agreement, proposed no FY '79 FMS
assistance for Nicaragua, declined to approve commercial
arms and other munitions list transfers to the
Nicaraguan Government, and advised the Nicaraguan
Government that if loans which do not meet basic human
needs come forward in the IFIs, we may have trouble
supporting them. This has resulted in the withdrawal
of a loan by Nicaragua. The Progress noted in 1977
was probably in part the result of U,S. actions and
representations with regard to. bilateral security and
development assistance and. IFI loans-. We have supported
basic human needs loans and grants to private voluntary
organizations.
Country
Pakistan
Action. Taken Amount Involved
.
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs -
7 approvals $214
The U.S. has made general human rights representations,
explaining inter alia that our policy calls for taking
human rights factors into account in our decisions on
whether to support IFI loans. Approval of some munitions--
related export licenses for civil law enforcement purposes
has been delayed. We have been concerned about the lack
of representative institutions. The regime has released
virtually all political prisoners held under the Bhutto
Government, including those charged in the so-,called
Hyderabad Conspiracy, several of whom were considered
prisoners of conscience. More recently, however, the
martial law administration, in anticipation of possible
violence in connection with the verdict and sentencing
in the Bhutto murder trial, imposed a ban on all political
activity. Pro-Bhutto political leaders and potential
demonstrators have been arrested for violation's of that
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-12--
ban. On March 18, the court found Bhutto guilty of
conspiracy to commit murder and imposed the :death
sentence. We expressed concern to the GOP, stressing
that the potential domestic and international reactions
to the carrying out of the death sentence should be
carefully weighed when judging whether or not to grant
clemency.
Country Actin Taken AmoUnt InViDiVed
�..
Paraguay 2 no votes $ 45,6
8 loans or grants $ 54.0
postponed( some
� temporarily.
5 approved $ 518
After several months during which Paraguay( in
apparent response.to U.S. human rights, representations,
delayed bringing forward a series of loans( the
Paraguayans recently re-introduced one of the loans in
the Inter-American Development Bank, The loan was
originally to be an FS0 loan, over which the U,S, would
have had a veto, but the Paraguayans re-introduced it
under the "hard window." The loan was approved over
the opposition of the U.S.. and some other countries,
This recent Paraguayan action may reflect a change
in what has been a responsive, if limited, reaction on
their part to our human rights initiatives to date.
Improvements in .Paraguay have centered mainly on-
-the release of, scores of political prisoners A some of
whom had been detained without trail between' ten and
twenty years. Several recent detainees have also been
processed and released promptly which Compares favorably
with past practices. The highly. centralized authoritarian
structure remains, however. President StroeSsner continues
to use the flexibility granted by the Continuing state of
siege to control opposition, the judiciary remains weak
or corrupt, and arbitrary arrests, mistreatment .o - -
prisoners and prolonged detentions without trial continue,
In addition to action in the IFIs, the U.S, has
delayed and denied some'export licenses for both commercial
CONFIDENTIAL.
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-13-
arms and munitions list items. We did not sign the FY '77
FMS financing agreement because of human rights concerns.
No decision has been taken on the FY '78 FMS agreement.
Our FY '79 security assistant request was reduced from
$500,000 in FY '78 to $300,000 partially for human rights
reasons. We have also held back on implementation of
new bilateral AID loans and made high level representations
on human rights issues, including one in which President
Stroessner told President Carter that he would allow the
Inter-American Human Rights Commission to visit Paraguay.
It now appears that Paraguay may not in fact issue such
an invitation despite continuous U.S. urging to do so.
It has been under pressure from some neighboring countries
not to allow the visit.
Country Action Taken 'Amount Involved
Philippines 3 abstentions $ 76
11 approvals $334
The following improvements have been noted in the
Philippines since last May: orders were issued to
limit the use of military tribunals for civilian purposes;
actions to expedite the trials of some 485 cases pending
before military tribunals; some political detainees were
among the 3,000 detainees of various sorts freed since
June 1, 1977: the martial law curfew was lifted, except
in a few areas where insurgents are active; also lifted
were the general restrictions on temporary travel abroad
by Filipinos. Elections for an interim national assembly
were held on April 7. There were numerous allegations
of massive electorial fraud and large demonstrations
protesting the alleged fraud. Over 500 of the demon-
strators were charged with sedition and then released;
8 are still in detention. Reports continue of arbitrary
arrest and mistreatment, including torture of prisoners
and politically motivated prolonged detentions, but such
reports are received at a diminished rate. Apart from
high level discussions on human rights, including a visit
by the Assistant Secretary for Human Rights and
Humanitarian Affairs, the only overt action.the U.S,. has.
taken to influence change has been the denial of some
commercial arms sales and actions in the IFis. The
CONFIDENTIAL
Anoroved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-14-
Philippine Government has noted our actions in the IFIs,
and it seems likely that they have played a-role in �
bringing about the improvements noted above,
Country
Romania
Action. Taken AMOunt Involved.
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs �
6 approvals - $303.,3
It is widely understood that the Romanian internal
system is tightly controlled. We have advised Romanian
officials of our legislative requirement to take human
rights considerations into account in determining our
position on IFI loans. Discussions during President
Ceausescu's visit to the U.S. April 11-1-17 included review
of our human rights concerns,
Country
Sierra Leone
Action Taken
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs
2 approvals
'Amount' Involved.
� The government recently released two of the three
opposition parliamentarians detained after last yeart's
general elections. The Sierra Leonean Foreign Minister
recently praised the U.S. human rights report on his
country as "'verywell balanced." Actions in Sierra Leone
to date have been limited to general representations on
human rights and our representation on IFI lending which,'
Specifically tied U.S. ability to continue Support for
loans to the human rights situation at the time they come
up for a vote in the IFI boards. Bilateral development
aid continues.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Country
Thailand
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL
-15-
Action Taken 'Amount Involved
diplomatic repre-
sentation on human
rights and the IFIs
7 approvals $325
The U.S. has made general human rights representations,
includingexpLainingthatour policy includes taking human
rights factors into account in our decisions on whether
to support IFI loans. The Assistant Secretary of Human
Rights and Humanitarian Affairs visited Thailand. The
U.S. has also delayed some export licenses for munitions
list items for civil law enforcement purposes. The
_ .
new government of Thailand has allowed organized labor
greater freedom, eased press restrictions, improved
trial procedures and stated its intention to hold
general elections before April 1979.
Country
Togo
Action Taken Amount Involved
diplomatic repre
sentation on human
rights and the 'Ills
�2 approvals $ 20.3
President Eyadema has responded positively to our
ongoing series of human rights demarches. He has released
the handful of political detainees he acknowedged holding
and invited the International Committee of the Red Cross
to visit Togo. Actions in Togo to date have been limited
to diplomatic representations.
Country Action Taken ' Amount Involved
,
Uruguay 1 loan temporarily $ 0.2
postponed
2 no votes $ 29.6
Uruguay continues to hold many political prisoners,
arbitrary arrests continue (but at a significantly
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
-
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
. CONFIDENTIAL
- 16 -
reduced level), and, in general, a repressive mechanism
is firmly entrenched. However, a new military command
with apparently liberal tendencies was installed. in
February. The U.S. has made. many representations to
the Uruguayan Government expressing human rights con-
cerns. Whilethe GOU listens to these expressions and
has allowed Some independent groups into Uruguay to .
assess. thesituation at first hand, it has until recently
taken few steps to respond to the recommendations of.'
-such groups Or the concerns expressed by the U.S. and �
other governments. It has set up an office to-receive
public inquiries regarding prisoners. Moreover, a:
mission endorsed by the American Bar Association
recently conferred with, and made strongrecommenda-
tions to, the Uruguayan leadership concerning human
rights abuses. They were-given an unexpectedly
cooperative reception.
Apart from U.S. action in the IFIs, we have denied
Export-Import Bank financing, the Overseas Private..
Investment Corporation decided against entering into
an agreement to operate in Uruguay, no new defense'
article shipments have been permitted for over a year,.
and we have not .requested security assistance for Uru-
guay for FY '79. � In addition the U.S., with the support
of several Latin American countries, rejected an invi-
tation from the Uruguayans to hold the next OAS General
Assembly in Montevideo because of the obstructionist
attitude the GOU has taken toward the work of the Inter-
American Human Rights Commission.
The Uruguayans temporarily postponed one loan for
$24 million, on which the U.S. subsequently voted no
when they reintroduced it..
Country � Action Taken Amount Involved'
Yemen, PDR I no vote $5.2
The Government of the People's Democratic Republic .
of Yemen has engaged in a Systematic pattern of repression
of human rights. Violations are considered so serious
that we felt obliged to vote against the IFI loan in
question (for 'irrigation) even though some aspects of -
the loan appeared to address basic human needs, and bur
action was unlikely to influence the PDRY. Another factor
taken into considerationwas the PDRYs active support of
-political terrorism. We have no representation in the PDRY
and, accordingly limited means for conduc4-4.ng a direct
dialogue in an ,c. ,ort to encourage change
-----CONFZDENTIAL
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
THE WHITE HOUSE
WAS
CONFIDENTIAL - GDS February 17, 1978
Presidential Directive/NSC-30
TO:
The Vice President
The Secretary of State
The Secretary of Defense
ALSO: The Secretary of the Treasury
The Attorney General
The Secretary of Commerce
The Director, Office of Management and Budget
The-United-States Representative to the
United Nations
The Administrator, Agency for International
Development
The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
The Director of Central Intelligence
The Director, United States Information Agency
SUBJECT: Human Rights
It shall be a major objective of U.S. foreign policy to promote
the observance of human rights throughout the world. The policy
shall be applied globally, but with due consideration to the
cultural, political and historical characteristics of each
nation, and to other fundarental U.S. interests with respect
to the nation in question.
Specifically:
1. It shall be the objective of the U.S. human rights policy
to reduce worldwide governmental violations of the integrity
of the person (e.g., torture; cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment; arbitrary arrest or imprisonment; lengthy de-
tention without trial, and assassination) and, to enhance
civil and political liberties (e.g., freedom of speech, of
religion, of assembly, of movement and of the press; and the
right to basic judicial protections). It will also be a
continuing U.S. objective to promote basic economic and
social rights (e.g., adequate food, education, shelter and
health).
CONFIDENTIAL - GDS
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL � GDS
2
2. In promoting human rights, the United States shall use
the full range of its diplomatic tools, including direct
dipldmatic contacts, public statements, symbolic acts,
consultations with allies, cooperation with non7-
'governmental organizations, and work with international
organizations..
. Greater reliance should be.placed on positive induce-
ments and incentives acknowledging improvements in
human rights whenever appropriate and possible,-through-
preferential treatment.in political relations and.
economic benefits.
- �
4. To this-end, countries with-a-good -or-substantially
improving record of human rights observance will he
given special consideration- in the. allocation .of U.S.
foreign assistance, just as countries with a poor or
deteriorating record will receive less favorable con-
sideration. Programs-for each fiscal year shall be
reviewed in this light.
5.- In the evaluation of the human rights condition of a
� foreign nation in the course of the implementation.of-
this directive, primary emphasis_shall be placed on
longer term trends and on the cumulative effect of-
specific events.
6. The U.S. shall- not, other than in exceptional circum�
stances, take any action. which. would' resultin material
� or financial support to the police, civil law.enforce-,
ment-authorities,:orothers.performing internal security
.functions of governments engaged in serious violations
of human rights.
7. U.S. 'human rights actions within the International
Tinancial Institutions shall be designed and Imple-
mented so as not to undermine the essential U.S. in-
terest of preserving these institutions as effective
economic instruments. To this end, future U.S. actions.
in the International Financial Institutions shall seek-
to: utilize.most effectively both our voice and our,
vote; understand and attempt to influence the Banks'
actions as early as possible in the loan process; and,
engage the support of other nations and Multilateral'
organizations.
CONFIDENTIAL.� GDF
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 C06628555
CONFIDENTIAL - L 3
8. The Interagency Group shall periodically report to the
PRC/NSC on the actions taken or recommended pursuant to
this Presidential Directive. In particular, the Inter-
agency Group shall, within two months, report on the.
effectiveness of recent U.S. actions in the International
Financial Institutions, with particular attention to:
Congressional attitudes and prospective legislation;
views of other nations as to the propriety and legality
of actions we may take; and, the effect of our actions
on the advancement of U.S. human rights objectives.
CONFIDENTIAL - GDS
Approved for Release: 2018/10/02 006628555