Greece - US Department of State
Greece - US Department of State
Greece - US Department of State
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Greece</strong> 771<br />
—Senate Report. This is included to give you the flavor <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Moose–Lowenstein report which is probably reflective <strong>of</strong> the current<br />
mood on Capitol Hill. 6<br />
Talking Points for Opening the Meeting<br />
1. There is no crisis in <strong>Greece</strong> and the choice among options is<br />
fairly narrow. However, it seemed worthwhile to review the situation<br />
since it has turned out somewhat differently from what we anticipated<br />
when the President made his decision to resume a normal military assistance<br />
relationship last June.<br />
2. You find on reading the IG paper that the choices are really relatively<br />
narrow. Since the basic assumptions underlying policy have<br />
changed, you would like to focus in the meeting on discussing whether<br />
the basic elements <strong>of</strong> our strategy are still valid. The tactics will have<br />
to be left to the <strong>State</strong> <strong>Department</strong>, but it does seem worthwhile here to<br />
discuss basic objectives.<br />
3. You would like, therefore, to aim at some sort <strong>of</strong> statement <strong>of</strong><br />
what it is we are and are not trying to achieve in <strong>Greece</strong>.<br />
4. You would like to divide the discussion into two parts:<br />
—the question <strong>of</strong> our general posture toward the military<br />
government;<br />
—the question <strong>of</strong> our posture toward King Constantine.<br />
General <strong>US</strong> Posture Toward <strong>Greece</strong><br />
Background. The IG paper does not really distinguish clearly between<br />
the two main options that it suggests. Option II is what Ambassador<br />
Tasca says he is doing now—prodding the regime privately<br />
on issues related to return to constitutional government. Option III is<br />
what the IG paper says is our current policy—a “passive” policy <strong>of</strong><br />
prodding only modestly when the opportunity arises. We need to arrive<br />
at a fairly precise statement <strong>of</strong> exactly what is going on and what<br />
we will try to do within what limits. The following talking points are<br />
suggested:<br />
—The IG paper outlines four options, but it points out that only<br />
Options II and III represent a real choice. Can we all agree on that?<br />
—What is the difference between Options II and III? The IG paper<br />
describes Option III as our present policy, while Ambassador Tasca<br />
has sent in a cable [copy on top <strong>of</strong> the IG paper] 7 saying that Option<br />
II reflects accurately the policy he has been following. Can someone<br />
6<br />
See footnote 4, Document 303.<br />
7<br />
Brackets in the original.