WASHINGTON - 21 July 1979 - Number 1792 - Dear Sir

Sep 21, 2026

Uploaded by Noah

A dated U.S. congressional and diplomatic discussion outlines how national mineral policy, strategic stockpiling, and Cold War economic threats should be structured. It contrasts three-year war-oriented stockpiles with a broader need for long-term defense through self-sufficiency, technology for low-grade ore, and industry-government substitution planning. The text then connects Central America and Latin America instability—especially Nicaragua and Cuba—with anxieties about broader regional pressures. It further analyzes Mexico’s trade leverage and OPEC-related policy confusion affecting U.S. market access.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages5

Reading Time13 min

AccessFree to download

MEXICO AS TARGET

PANIC ON NICARAGUA

MEXICAN TRADE

REMINDER ON MEXICO

WASHINGTON 21 July 1979 Number 1792 Dear Sir: "Dijo Figueiredo que Brasil esta alborde de una economia de guerra."…UPI. "If the sole alternative to Somozais the Sandinistas,we may reap thewhirlwind. If the radical left be-comes dominant in Central America,even Mexico will feel the pressure."…Former Secretary of StateKissinger. "There can no longer be any doubt aboutthe Cuban connection in Nicaragua...AndMexico is the ultimate target." ..Chairman,House MerchantMarine and FisheriesCommittee. When H.R.2154(The Strategic and Critical Materials Stockpiling Act)wasTHEbeing debated on the Senate floor,Senator Thurmond pointed out that U.S.MINERALSpolicy is now to gear stockpiles to a three-year war,rather than to theSTOCKPILEone-year war such as had been proposed by the Nixon Administratfon. There are of course differing concepts of the minerals problem,Mr.VARYINGSimon Straus,vice-chairman of American Smelting and Refining CompanyDEFINITIONSclaimed that the role of the developing countries was being exaggeratedOF THEas minerals suppliers because three developed countries(Canada,Australia,PROBLEMand South Africa)are in aggregate more important than all the developingcountries combined.The bureaucrats here emphasize that "the Nation'smineral economy continues on the decline and the country increasingly de-pendent on imports which poses a threat to national security if the U.s.were to be deniedaccess to foreign resources for any of a number of reasons which are arising at increasedfrequency in our international relations." The core problem is a different one,we feel.The U.S.is stockpilingIS THEfor military confrontation.But it is the potential of economic confronta-COREtion that should be the basis of policy.The success of the oil cartelPROBLEM THEhas inflamed every self-defined "statesman"that it can be duplicated inMILITARYminerals,and the expanding role of governments in minerals productionCHALLENGE?has altered totally both the pricing problem and the ease of formation ofcartels.A drawdown of a stockpile created in anticipation of a militarychallenge,to fight an economic cartel challenge,would be il1-timed becauseit would be using resources intended for military contingencies at precisely the time whenthe U.S.is most vulnerable to the military threat. What we are saying is that the physical quantity in stockpile is not theTHE REALdefense on which H.R.2154 properly rests.What is needed now is to expandDEFENSEcapacity for maximizing self-sufficiency which means investment in techno-IS NOT INlogy of low-grade ore exploitation and possible ignoring of price whileA THREE-YEAR facilities are brought into being,and preparations for intensive substi-WAR CHESTtution through industry-government cooperation. Meanwhile,the descent from Camp David has left the vital Latin Americanproblems untouched: (1)The panic in Washington over the successor government in NicaraguaPANIC ONis very real.Just as President Johnson remembered Castro's false pro-NICARAGUAmises of anti-communism when the Dominican Republic emergency occurred(and which he is now regarded as having over-reacted to),Washington re-members such misguided ignorance as that displayed by Senator Aiken,oneof the most respected members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,when he returnedfrom a junket to Havana on the eve of the Castro triumph.At that time,the Senatorpontificated:"It is difficult to conceive of the possibility that any new regime inCuba would be unfriendly to the United States."Why?Because "the supporters of Castroinclude citizens from all classes in Cuban society."Again,"the Cuban people dearlytake pride in their national independence."Again,"it is doubtful whether the standardof living of Cubans has ever been so high." Looking at a Cuba become meekly the lap-dog of Russia,its economic growthstunted for decades,all its freedoms ended,its unfriendliness to the U.S,become themainstay of its capacity to stay in power,Washington is in panic which

FAQs

How does the document connect Nicaragua, Cuba, and Mexico to broader regional security concerns?

It describes U.S. panic regarding Nicaragua’s successor government and Cuba’s shifting alignment, then claims diverse officials’ concerns support the view that regional pressures may extend beyond Mexico.

Sep 21, 2026

Uploaded by Noah