Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1944, General: Economic and Social Matters, Volume II

800.796/796

The Department of State to the Brazilian Embassy ⁵

undated

Memorandum

Representatives of the Department of State and the Civil Aeronautics Board recently exchanged views on international civil aviation with representatives of the British Cabinet Committee on Civil Air Transport in London. The specific purpose of the conversations was to prepare the way for a possible international conference on civil aviation to be held later.

Three general fields were covered: namely, (1) Technical aspects of international aviation; (2) Policies with respect to economic aspects of international aviation; (3) An international organization as a permanent feature of international aviation.

With respect to the first subject, there was little divergence of view since all parties recognized the necessity for standardization of technical arrangements wherever possible. Accordingly, arrangements were made for continuing conversations by technical experts of the two Governments in the following fields:

(a) Communications systems and air navigation aids;

(b) A collection of exchange of meteorological information;

(c) Rules of the air and traffic control practices;

(d) Customs and immigration requirements;

(e) Rules relating to the exemption from taxation of fuel, oil and other supplies and spare parts intended for use in transport aircraft in international service;

(f) Regulations relating to the prevention of any transmission of communicable disease by aircraft;

(g) Standards governing the licensing of operating and mechanical personnel;

(h) Requirements relative to the certification of aircraft and their equipment as airworthy.

Experts in each of these fields to be designated by the appropriate authorities in Great Britain and in the United States are expected to enter into these discussions shortly.

With respect to the economic aspects of international aviation, it is understood that the present British views depend in some measure on further exploration of the subject of a permanent international aviation organization. Subject to this understanding, however, a number of subjects were discussed.

It was agreed that each nation must maintain sovereignty of the air over its national territory and coastal waters. However, it was also agreed that the interests of most nations are best served by permitting freedom of transit with rights of technical stop, and with rights of commercial entry at numerous suitable airports designated: for that purpose. Arrangements should therefore be made for transit of aircraft analogous to existing arrangements which provide for transit by foreign ships, foreign automobiles, and foreign railroad trains. Understandings relating to the right of free transit would be contingent upon the reaching of mutually satisfactory understandings by bilateral agreement with respect to the right of commercial entry.

It was noted that the policy of the British Government has in part already been announced as follows in a speech made by Lord Beaverbrook in the House of Lords: “As for the bases under our control …^5a the Government have no desire to exclude aircraft of other nations. We demand no prescriptive right to the use of airfields for ourselves. Rather do we mean to use them for the purpose of steadily developing civil aviation throughout the world.” And again: “Complete freedom of the air in the present state of the world might result in commercial anarchy.” This policy, if generally adopted, would appear to eliminate any doubt as to the use of the airports constructed by any of the United Nations in territories of others for war purposes, since under this policy such of these airports as are useful for commercial purposes will become available for international air traffic.

It was agreed that on established international air routes the number and frequencies of schedules should be those needed to carry the available traffic. Adequate facilities should at all times be available for the traffic desiring transportation.

Cabotage would in all probability be reserved but should be considered as including only traffic within a country and between that country and its colonies or dependents, but not between self-governing affiliated countries, such as Great Britain and the British Dominions.

It was agreed that wherever possible civil aviation should be established on a sound commercial basis and be self-supporting without government subsidy; nevertheless it was recognized that such a result could probably only be attained gradually. The principle was expressed that subsidies were legitimate to keep aircraft in the air but were not legitimate for the purpose of creating conditions which would force other aircraft out of the air.

Nothing should be done to discourage the development of new types of aircraft performing better service than older types at a comparable operating cost.

It was agreed that international control in the technical field is desirable and in many cases is essential. However, in the economic field the view of the United States has been that since pre-war experience is not adequate as a guide and post-war conditions are still speculative, the facts of the case cannot yet be fully developed. Therefore the degree of international control which would be desirable cannot yet be determined.

An international fact-finding body during a transition period might be extremely useful and if it functioned in a manner to command the confidence of all governments such a body might gradually undertake certain economic functions. In the meantime, mutual and frequent consultations between the aeronautical authorities of the various governments concerned would serve to deal with the various economic problems as they arise. Furthermore, occasional international air conferences would furnish a suitable medium for examining problems of general interest for which solutions might be found which could be adopted by general consent.

5. Marginal notation reads: “Mailed to Brazilian Embassy unsigned and undated in an entirely unofficial manner on May 6, 1944. A. A. B[erle].” Identical memoranda were handed to the Soviet Ambassador on May 6 and to the chief Chinese delegate, Mr. Chang Kia-Ngau, on May 9; each was informed that the document was given him confidentially, unofficially and for his personal use. An identical memorandum was also transmitted to the Canadian Embassy on May 11. (800.796/825, 833d, and 883a)
6. Omission indicated in the original memorandum.