Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:38:26.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

American credits for Soviet development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Michael Kaser
Michael Kaser
Affiliation:
Professorial Fellow and University Reader in Economics, St Antony's College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

No Western legislature has devoted as much time to examining the political issues of economic relations with the U.S.S.R. than the United States Congress. The reason is in no wise to be found in the magnitude of those relations, but in their potential size and in their implications for confrontation or detente between the two super-powers of the globe. A remoter history has, however, played its part, for much United States technology and capital equipment and some entrepreneurship assisted Soviet economic development between the two world wars.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , July 1977 , pp. 137 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 137 note 1. Report on Export-Import Bank Amendments of 1974, Committee on Banking, Homing and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, 93rd Congress, 2nd Session, 15 Aug. i974 (USGPO, 1974) as cited in Stevenson III, Adlai E., ‘Views on Eximbank Credits to the U.S.S.R.’, in Marer, P. (ed.), U.S. Financing of East-West Trade (International Development Research Centre, Bloomington, Ind., 1975)Google Scholar.

page 138 note 1. Agreement with respect to purchases of grain, in U.S.–Soviet Commercial Agreements, 1972 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1972), p. 19Google Scholar.

page 138 note 2. Hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, 88th Congress, 2nd Session, Part I, 13, 16, 23 Mar., 8, 9 Apr. 1964 (USGPO, 1964), p. 177Google Scholar.

page 138 note 3. Report to the President of the Special Committee on U.S. Trade Relations with East European Countries and the Soviet Union, 29 April 1965, p. 16Google Scholar (the Miller Committee).

page 138 note 4. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Europe of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, 90th Congress, 2nd Session (USGPO, 1968), p. 140Google Scholar.

page 139 note 1. Hearings before the Subcommittee on International Finance of the Committee on Banking and Currency, United States Senate, 90th Congress, 2nd Session (USGPO, 1968), p. 129Google Scholar.

page 139 note 2. United States International Economic Policy in an Interdepartmental World (the ‘Williams Report'), pp. 15–16 (USGPO, 1971)Google Scholar.

page 139 note 3. From which came the Export Expansion Finance Act of that year repealing the absolute prohibition on Eximbank credit for countries not themselves in armed conflict with the United States.

page 139 note 4. A Foreign Economic Perspective (USGPO, 1971), p. 28Google Scholar (Peterson was then assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, becoming later Secretary of Commerce).

page 139 note 5. U.S.–Soviet Commercial Relationships in a New Era (U.S. Department of Commerce, August 1972), pp. 18, 20Google Scholar.

page 139 note 6. Ibid. p. 6.

page 140 note 1. US.–Soviet Commercial Agreements, iyjz: Texts, Summaries and Supporting Papers (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1972), p. 76Google Scholar.

page 140 note 2. Ibid. p. 89. Similar determinations had just previously been made for Romania (1971) and for Poland (1972).

page 140 note 3. U.S.–Soviet Commercial Relations: the Interplay of Economics, Technology Transfer and Diplomacy, preparedfor the Subcommittee on National Security Policy and Scientific Developments of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, 10 June 1973 (USGPO, 1973), p. 58Google Scholar.

page 140 note 4. Western Investment in Communist Economies, preparedfor the Subcommittee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, 5 August. 1974 (USGPO, 1974)Google Scholar. This and the preceding paper were chiefly drafted by J. P. Hardt and G. D. Holliday of the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.

page 140 note 5. Science, Technology and Diplomacy in the Age of Interdependence, prepared for the Subcommittee on International Security and Scientific Affairs of the Committee on International Relations, U.S. House of Representatives, June 1976 (USGPO, 1976)Google Scholar.

page 141 note 1. See for example, the present writer's article in Foreign Policy (Summer 1975), esp. pp. 123–5Google Scholar and Petrov, V., U.S. Soviet Detente (American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C.), 1975, pp. 19–23Google Scholar.

page 141 note 2. Section 7(b) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 as amended through 4 Jan. 1975.

page 141 note 3. Section 411 of the Trade Act of 1975.

page 142 note 1. Speeches at the Jubilee Dinner of the British-Soviet Chamber of Commerce, reported in the Financial Times, 22 October. 1976, p. 7Google Scholar.

page 142 note 2. The proceedings of the Round Table are unpublished; the writer was a member of the British side.

page 142 note 3. Press Bulletin, Moscow Narodny Bank, nos. 782, 27 Oct. and 786, 24 Nov. 1976, p. 13.

page 142 note 4. Brief biography in the Financial Times, 31 January 1975, p. 19Google Scholar; concession details in Sutton, A. C., Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1917 to 1930 (Stanford, 1968), pp. 108, 183, 237, 268Google Scholar.

page 143 note 1. Business Week, 6 December 1976Google Scholar.

page 143 note 2. Sutton, A. C., Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1930–1945 (Stanford, 1971), p. 343Google Scholar.

page 143 note 3. Ibid. p. vii.

page 143 note 4. Loc. cit. p. 21Google Scholar.

page 144 note 1. Pisar, S., Coexistence and Commerce (New York and London, 1970), p. 35Google Scholar.

page 144 note 2. Pravda, 6 April 1966Google Scholar; see Hanson, P. in Pipes, R. (ed.), Soviet Strategy in Europe (New York and London, 1976) (paper jointly with present writer), p. 225Google Scholar; and in Brown, A. and Kaser, M. (eds.), The Soviet Union since the Fall of Khrushchev (New York and London, 1975), pp. 21–22Google Scholar.

page 144 note 3. As reported by Lascelles, D., Financial Times, 5 May 1977Google Scholar (the erroneous attribution to Professor Richard Pipes was corrected in ibid, 11 May.

page 145 note 1. Economic Bulletinfor Europe, vol. 28 (1976)Google Scholar.

page 145 note 2. 27·2 per cent of Soviet turnover in 1976–80 (the present writer's estimate in International Currency Review, vol. 8 no. 6 (1976), against 27–7 per cent in 1971–5.Google Scholar

page 145 note 3. Nötel, R., ‘Problems of Financial Cooperation between the Two Monetary Systems’ in Cornelson, D.et al. (eds.), Perspektiven und Vrobleme wirtschaftlicher Zusammenarbeit zwiscben Ost-und Westeuropa (Duncker und Humblot, Berlin, 1976), p. 182Google Scholar.

page 146 note 1. Hardt and Holliday in Marer, , op. cit. and in Hearings before the Committee on Commerce, United States Senate, 94th Congress, 1st and 2nd Sessions 11–12 December 1975, 30 January, 4 March 1976 (USGPO, 1977) pp. 193–209Google Scholar.

page 146 note 2. Treaties and other International Acts Series 7910 (USGPO, 1974), Articles I and IIIGoogle Scholar.

page 146 note 3. The United States Role in East-West Trade, Problems and Prospects (U.S. Department of Commerce) by Morton, Rogers, Secretary of Commerce, August 1975 (the ‘Morton Report’), pp. 11–12Google Scholar.

page 146 note 4. Morton Report, p. 14; and see Spigler, I., Direct Western Investment in East Europe, Papers in East European Economics, no. 48, St Antony's College, Oxford (1975, Holdan Books Oxford)Google Scholar and Goldman, M., Detente and Dollars: Doing Business with the Soviets (Basic Books, New York, 1975), pp. 127–42Google Scholar.

page 147 note 1. (See International Currency Review, vol. 8, no. 3 (1976), pp. 17 and 76Google Scholar for IIB in 1976 and Financial Times 3 May 1977Google Scholar for IBEC rebuffs. The latter was represented (for £400 million) in May 1977 by IIB.

page 147 note 2. Viz. on interest rates, terms of amortization, period of grace and risk of non-repayment and of cost of litigation (see Hardt and Holliday in Marer, op. cit., p. 296Google Scholar).

page 148 note 1. Ibid. p. 299.

page 148 note 2. Some would say that the political system of the U.S.S.R. discourages innovation; see the present writer's ‘Government and Innovation in the U.S.S.R.’, Annuaire de I'USRR et les pays del'Est 1976 (Istra, Paris, 1977).

page 148 note 3. Hanson, , in Pipes, op. cit. p. 228Google Scholar.

page 149 note 1. Wolynski, A., Western Economic Aid to the U.S.S.R., Conflict Studies, no. 72 (Institute for the Study of Conflict, London, 1976), p. 11Google Scholar.

page 149 note 2. Morton Report, p. 45.Google Scholar

page 149 note 3. Ibid. p. 27.

page 149 note 4. Western Investment in Communist Economies (1974), op. cit. p. 57Google Scholar.

page 150 note 1. US. Soviet Commercial Relations (1973), op. cit. p. 44Google Scholar.

page 150 note 2. Petrov, , op. cit. p. 19Google Scholar.