CONFIDENTIAL
--2---
CONTENT WITH NOTHING LESS THAN COMPREHENSIVE ARRANGEMENTS, WE CANNOT BE SURE THAT THE PRESIDENT, IF HE HAS INDEED COME TO THIS VIEW, HAS DONE SO IN FULL KNOWLEDGE AND CONSIDERATION OF ALL THE
FACTS AND THE ALTERNATIVES.
3. IN CONGRESS ALL THE VISIBLE PRESSURES ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE TEXTILE PROTECTIONISTS WHO HAVE REFRAINED FROM PRESSING LEGISLATION ONLY BECAUSE THEY HOPE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WILL DO THE JOB WITHOUT IT. NOT ALL CONGRESSMEN WHO PUT THEIR NAMES TO PROTECTIONIST MEASURES WOULD NECESSARILY VOTE THE SAME WAY AND IT
IS NOT. A FOREGONE CONSLUSION THAT A TEXTILE QUOTA BILL WOULD PASS.
IT IS STILL DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE THAT THE MORE RESPONSIBLE LEADERS OF CONGRESS WOULD WISH TO COMMIT, THE UNITED STATES TO SUCH A FUNDAMENTAL BREACHING OF THE G.A.T.T. THERE IS AT PRESENT, HOWEVER, NO RESTRAINT ON THE HILL UPON THE LINE WHICH STANS IS TAKING, IN A WORD, WE CANNOT COUNT ON ENOUGH DOMESTIC OR INTERNAL PRESSURE TO GIVE THE ADMINISTRATION SECOND THOUGHTS,
:
4. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE COULD SOON FIND OURSELVES AT THAT POINT OF NO RETURN FOR WHICH, AS WE HAVE RECONGNISED ALL ALONG, AMERICAN POLICY WAS HEADING (SEE IN PARTICULAR PARAGRAPHS 4 AND 5 OF TELEGRAM NO.1129 OF 10 APRIL). THE POINT WOULD BE PASSED IF EITHER A MAJOR EXPORTING COUNTRY CAVED IN ON COMPREHENSIVE RESTRAINTS OR, FACED WITH CONTINUING FOREIGN OPPOSITION, THE UNITED STATES SIMPLY IMPOSED ITS WILL. ONCE THE POINT WAS PASSED WE SHOULD ALL, AS FAR AS I CAN SEE, BE FACED UNAVOIDABLY WITH THE ALTERNATIVES OF
(A) ACQUIESCING, EITHER TACITLY OR UNDER SOME CRACK-PAPERING FORMULA, IN RESTRICTIONS NOT JUSTIFIED UNDER G.A.T.T. IN THIS EVENT PROTECTIONISTS EVERYWHERE WOULD KNOW THAT THEY HAD ONLY TO GENERATE ENOUGHT POLITICAL PRESSURE TO GET THEIR WAY REGARDLESS OF ECONOMIC MERIT AND THAT THE G.A.T.T. AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL DISCIPLINES NEED NOT IMPEDE THEM. THE FIRST TO SEIZE ON THE
CONFIDENTIAL
/PRECEDENT