740.00119 EAC/11–1144: Telegram
The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Gallman) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 11—9:36 a.m.]
9832. For the Under Secretary and Mr. Dunn from Mosely. Embassy’s 9776, November 9, 8 p.m., 9785, November 10, 2 p.m. It has become evident that the Russians are stalling on signature of the Control Machinery Protocol until they are sure we are going to complete the Protocol on Zones of Occupation in Germany.
At Monday’s54 meeting Gousev settled all but one outstanding point both in the protocol and the transmitting report with a cordiality and flexibility which he had seldom shown before; and at the close he made his statement on the necessity for completing the Protocol on Zones, with great earnestness. By Tuesday evening the one outstanding minor point had also been settled. The texts have been agreed for signature. But the Russians have carefully avoided setting a definite time for signing the Control Machinery Protocol, while offering to meet even on Sunday55 if that will speed up our business. The only conclusion is that they have instructions not to sign one protocol without the other. They have applied this pressure in a most tactful and indirect way and are not doing it in concert with the British, for Strang has not caught on to this tactic. Naturally I have refrained from pointing it out to Strang for the reason that if the Russians were brought into the question of whether to use the words “he determines” or “may be agreed” they would undoubtedly prefer the latter, in view of their reference on Monday to the need for arriving at similar agreements regarding transit across the Soviet zone (Embassy’s 9643, November 6, 11 p.m.).
The Russian stand is a logical one. The two protocols stand or fall together. If the occupation is shifted from a tripartite to a four party basis as a result of French membership in the EAC, it will obviously be necessary to change the control machinery to a four power basis two [too]. In view of this logic, the Russians may possibly suspect that the British and we are stalling on a relatively minor point in the Protocol on Zones in order to bring in the French as full [Page 392] partners in both occupation and control, since this would actually be the effect of failing to complete both protocols before the French join the European Advisory Commission. I do not believe that this is the present British desire, and Strang himself has urged Dejean56 and Massigli57 not to upset the tripartite arrangements already made through injecting demands of their own. In any case, if we do not complete the Protocol on Zones now, we must be prepared to assume that the Russians will believe that we did so deliberately in order to change the whole basis of the control of Germany to a four power basis and that they may draw far-reaching conclusions from that with regard to American support for a British led west European bloc. [Mosely.]