Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume XXXVII, Energy Crisis, 1974–1980

54. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in France¹

Washington, April 14, 1975, 2013Z.

84578. Subject: Consumer/Producer Prepcon. For Robinson from Secretary.

1. Reading drafts of agenda exchanged over weekend² indicates that industrialized countries have shown very great and perhaps excessive flexibility on question of agenda. Central focus of conference on energy question is essential from our viewpoint. It is unclear how US–EC–Japan redraft of text in Paris 9306³ meets main requirement stated para 9 of Paris 9307⁴ with which we agree. Regardless of how final agenda comes out, it must be clear for public presentation purpose here that conference will be centered on world energy problems and actions which producers and consumers can take separately and together, to help alleviate these problems for all countries and MSA’s in particular. You should therefore reiterate our requirement of clear linkage between other agenda issues and energy. You should also note that other issues such as participation, date, site and chairmanship have not yet been resolved. On question of participation you should maintain position that invitation to IEA is absolute prerequisite our attendance conference. You should not agree on final text of agenda and other conference issues without my prior approval.

2. In view likely outcome of Prepcon,⁵ I question whether you should not immediately reschedule visit to Tehran. I place a higher value on our bilateral relations with Iran than on rhetorical sparring with OPEC/LDC group. From Ansary’s reaction Iranians apparently regard your visit there as urgent. You could set deadline your departure Paris Tuesday,⁶ either leaving Enders in charge of delegation or have all of U.S. delegation depart. You should decide this on basis which course best contributes to result we seek.

3. I wish it clearly understood by our entire delegation that outcome of preparatory meeting is of greater concern to me than whether we have unanimity with other countries. In final analysis they need US participation at conference. We remain ready to attend properly prepared energy conference between consumers and producers as originally called by French. We are not prepared to attend raw materials conference where energy issue has seen all but submerged. We will maintain this posture even at risk taking responsibility for failure of preparatory meeting.⁷

Kissinger

1. Source: Ford Library, National Security Adviser, Presidential Country Files for Europe and Canada, Box 4, France—State Department Telegrams from SECSTATE–NODIS (3). Confidential; Nodis; Flash. Drafted by Katz; cleared by Hartman, Atherton, and Sonnenfeldt; and approved by Kissinger. Repeated Immediate to Tehran.
2. See footnotes 3, 5, and 7, Document 53.
3. Dated April 13. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy Files, D750128–1165)
4. See footnote 5, Document 53.
5. After meeting from 1 to 7 a.m. on April 15 in a “last ditch effort to resolve the agenda question,” the two sides agreed that they could make no further progress on the issues that separated them, including the “scope of the full conference, indexation, maintenance of real value,” and others. Because of the “lack of any prospect of reconciling respective negotiating mandates,” the delegations decided that “it would not be productive to continue the exercise of the past nine days.” At 1 p.m. that day, Chairman de Guiringaud tried to give the group of industrialized nations another agenda proposal on behalf of the seven OPEC/LDC countries. Robinson and the other delegation heads, however, “noted that the paper was not a formal proposal and refused to accept it on an informal basis.” Furthermore, the U.S. representatives no longer wanted to permit the French Chairman to “exercise the role of an intermediary” and remarked that it seemed that only he among everyone present “refused to recognize” that the meeting was “dead.” (Telegram 9533 from Paris, April 15; National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy Files, D750131–0570)
6. April 15. The conference ended on April 16.
7. In his closing remarks at the end of the conference, Enders said: “We were, of course, invited here by the President of the French Republic to prepare for a conference on energy and energy-related issues. We came here ready to discuss these issues, which are of central concern to all countries. Others have insisted on a much broader conference, extending to all aspects of the relationship between the industrialized countries and the developing world. We have been and will continue to be willing to discuss seriously raw materials and other development issues in forums more directly concerned with them and to attempt therein to seek mutually beneficial solutions. However, we believe that the proposed conference could achieve constructive results only if it were focused on a relatively limited number of points related to the central subject of energy.” For the full text of his remarks, see Department of State Bulletin, May 12, 1975, p. 621.