800.796/7–1344
Minutes of an Exploratory Conversation Between Officials of the New Zealand and United States Governments on July 5, 1944
Present
| American Group | New Zealand Group |
| Mr. Joseph C. Grew, Chairman | Mr. Peter Fraser47 |
| Mr. Adolf A. Berle, Jr. | Mr. C. A. Berendsen48 |
| Mr. Josh Lee44 | Mr. A. D. McIntosh49 |
| Mr. William A. M. Burden | |
| Mr. Stokeley W. Morgan | |
| Mr. John D. Hickerson45 | |
| Mr. Robert B. Stewart46 |
Mr. Grew made some introductory remarks and presented copies of the agenda, Summary of Objectives, and draft bilateral convention to the Prime Minister.
Mr. Fraser said that he had discussed aviation matters in London with Lord Beaverbrook and others and had been informed of the talks which Mr. Berle had had in England and was aware of the position taken by the United States. He felt a keen disappointment at the way things were going for it seemed to him that the more we talked the vaguer the situation became.
New Zealand, of course, stands on the Canberra Agreement with Australia50 in favor of internationally owned airlines operating under license from an international body. They realize that this is not acceptable to all nations, and they are prepared to make concessions. The Canberra Agreement as it stands is not even wholly acceptable to Canada and the United Kingdom. However, for the present, that is the New Zealand position.
Mr. Fraser felt that the sort of international body which the United States seemed to want would have little or no authority and, in fact, very little to do. He favored an international body with real powers subject to an international organization which would be in a position to make a real contribution to the peace and stability of the postwar world. Failure to set up such an organization would mean the loss of a great opportunity, and if no change were made in the method of handling international aviation matters we would in a certain sense have fought the war in vain.
Mr. Grew said that the United States visualizes an international organization which will have a great deal to do, especially with regard to technical matters.
Mr. Fraser said that New Zealand was in favor of all the minimum powers which the United States was willing to see the international body assume, but it wanted more powers accorded to the international body. He said that he had received the impression in England from the reports he heard of the talks between Mr. Berle and Lord Beaverbrook that the United States felt that the smaller nations did not count, that they should give way to the wishes of the bigger nations.
In reply Mr. Berle said that such is not our attitude at all. We have not ignored the small nations in these discussions. We have urged that they be heard. However, to the United States, aviation is a primary factor in national security. Accordingly, the fate of our aviation is of first concern. A large part of the American public sees in international aviation not the idealism of Mr. Fraser but a desire by a number of other nations to divide up the American traffic. This the American public would not agree to. It will not permit us to get [Page 504] into the same situation we were in before the war with respect to shipping.
We have no reason to believe that the Soviets will move in any great degree in the direction envisaged in the Canberra statement.
We believe that institutions grow slowly; it would put an intolerable strain on an international organization to ask it to function without real power, prestige and background and without the trust and confidence of the great powers. That leads only to futility, as in the case of the League of Nations.
Mr. Fraser said that of course the international body must have power to enforce its decisions. Should we not endeavor to get what we really want—not aim at a minimum.
Mr. Lee said that while the Prime Minister’s position was admirable as an idealistic approach, we must take a realistic attitude. There is no use in aiming for something that will not get public support. We should start slowly and then progress as confidence in the international body grows.
Mr. Fraser said that agreement on technical matters could have been arrived at at any time. To accomplish this is no real progress.
Mr. Lee said that final international acceptance of technical standards would be a great gain.
Allowing for the good reasons for the United States position, Mr. Fraser said that New Zealand hopes that more can be accomplished to bring it closer in line with the views of the British Commonwealth. Under the United States plan the problem of the Pacific area can probably be settled without difficulty, but a great opportunity to settle these problems in the rest of the world will have been missed.
Mr. Berle drew a parallel with the Pan American Union, which started in 1890 and has grown steadily until it is now a sound, strong bond between the nations and made a very effective contribution to the war effort. We are inclined to follow that same procedure.
Mr. Fraser thought that time did not allow of that method being applied to a new international body to deal with world security.
Mr. Fraser asked what the United States is afraid of in a new international body, how would it prejudice our interests?
Mr. Berle answered that the power of a licensing body could be activated in anybody’s interest. It could also reject plans or approve plans of other nations. We feel it should only act as a sort of fire alarm to call attention to dangerous situations; the countries concerned should then correct the situation.
Mr. Fraser asked what if they did not?
Mr. Berle said that would be unfortunate, but the same situation would exist if the body had powers and the nations did not acquiesce [Page 505] in the exercise of those powers. Such questions could be referred to a World Court if one were created.
Mr. Fraser said the Canadian scheme could only be implemented if the international body were a part of a world organization with effective powers to exert its authority.
Mr. Lee emphasized that agreement on a number of technical fields, with implementation, would be a very decided step forward and would help to set up machinery which would assist in working out satisfactory settlements between the nations.
Mr. Fraser said that New Zealand would agree to anything no matter how small if it were a step in the right direction. New Zealand is interested in an Australia–New Zealand airline to Canada and the United Kingdom, and in a line from New Zealand to Panama, and is ready to enter into bilateral arrangements at any time.
Mr. Grew said that we were much gratified to hear that New Zealand will go along as far as we do.
Mr. Berle asked whether New Zealand contemplated a separate airline or one in conjunction with other Dominions. Mr. Fraser said personally he favored operating in conjunction. He could not speak for all of his colleagues.
Also Mr. Berle asked whether New Zealand would like to enter into technical discussions with ourselves and others. It was decided that New Zealand would not but that Mr. Morgan would send to Mr. Berendsen the technical document51 which had been submitted to other groups.
- New Zealand Prime Minister.↩
- New Zealand Minister in the United States.↩
- Member of the Civil Aeronautics Board.↩
- New Zealand Secretary of External Affairs.↩
- Chief, Division of British Commonwealth Affairs.↩
- Member of the Division of British Commonwealth Affairs.↩
- Agreement between Australia and New Zealand, signed at Canberra, January 21, 1944, The United Nations Review, vol. iv, 1944, No. 2, p. 52.↩
- Presumably one of several technical documents in files not printed.↩