762.022/10–2054: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Dillon) to the Department of State 1
priority
1655. French and German accounts of yesterday’s Mendes–Adenauer meeting agree that meeting went well, that atmosphere was good and that only major difficulty encountered as with respect to French insistence political agitation in Saar for return to Germany be prohibited. Only difference is as to which side will yield on this point.
Experts of two delegations are working intensively on Saar and overall Franco-German economic relationships and Adenauer has summoned his coalition leaders to meet with him here tomorrow. We understand from Germans that he had planned to summon them in any event.
Following account given us by Soutou. German account being cabled separately:2
Soutou states that agreement was reached to use Van Naters’ report3 as basis with such modification as might be necessary in light of present difficulties in carrying out Europeanization by precise states. He states, and Germans confirm, that agreement was reached on formula that Saar statute could not be changed except by peace treaty. French had agreed there should be referendum on the statute but that thereafter it would, except for peace treaty or action by some future Saar referendum, be definitive. Soutou states French position is due to conviction Saar settlement must make real contribution to Franco-German rapprochement and that continued agitation following referendum for return to Germany would provide constant irritant French were willing to give up right of prior authorization for political parties but insist their activities be within framework of Saar statute. (In this connection he cited freedom of US parties within framework of US Constitution.)
Soutou said that complete deadlock had been reached on this point and, in answer to question as to what solution he envisaged, he said that he saw none unless Adenauer would yield following consultation with his coalition leaders. Germans on other hand thought Mendes might modify his stand on this point.
With respect to US and UK commitments, Soutou stated French no longer desired commitment to support settlement in peace treaty negotiations but still desired guarantee of agreement until peace treaty.
With respect to administration, French were prepared to accept one commissioner who would be appointed by Brussels Treaty Council with agreement of France, Germany and Saar but not national of any of three. His deputy would be Saarlander. French state Germans had suggested two formulas: (1) single commissioner appointed by Council [Page 1403] of Europe or (2) tripartite commission composed of one French, and one German and with neutral chairman. Soutou said that Adenauer preferred first while his delegation preferred second and that there should be no particular difficulty in getting together on single commissioner. French could not accept tripartite commission. Provision would be made for evolution of administration in accordance with progress made toward European integration.
Both sides indicated that agreement on economic questions should be relatively easy.
While each side seems overconfident that other will yield on political parties, it is apparent that each side recognizes absolute indispensability of reaching agreement this week and anticipates it will be reached. Soutou commented that German thinking, including that on relations east and reunification, already considers German NATO membership in the “bank” and we believe Mendes has same feeling about London accords.