840.50/7–2044
The British Chargé (Campbell) to the Under Secretary of State (Stettinius)
My Dear Mr. Under Secretary: You will no doubt recall that on the 24th [23rd] February the President telegraphed the Prime Minister about the future work of the Combined Boards and after stating that in his opinion the work done by these combined organisations had been most helpful in the conduct of the war stated that he thought the time had come to consider the part that they should play in future and in particular how other countries should be associated in their work. The Prime Minister on the 16th [15th] of April replied to this proposal. He concurred fully with the views put forward by the President, suggested that the discussions on this subject should take place in Washington between representatives of the appropriate United States and United Kingdom agencies and stated that the necessary instructions would be sent to the United Kingdom representatives concerned in Washington. These instructions have now been received. The question therefore arises of the form which such discussions should take and how they should best be initiated. It is our view that the discussions should be informal and exploratory only and that their purpose should be to discover the extent to which the views of the Member Governments are developing on similar lines. It would be our hope that such discussions would make it possible then to decide what further action was required.
If you should agree with the idea of holding informal discussions on this basis the question arises of the best method to adopt. In our view the manner in which we arrange to hold these discussions is important. The work of one Board differs from that of another and [Page 58] each has therefore tended to meet its problems in the way best suited to itself. These differences in the nature of the approach made by the Boards to the problems each has to solve tend to make general discussions in precise terms about their future scope and work somewhat difficult since what applies to one Board does not necessarily or equally apply to another. On the other hand there are certain general principles which will we think be found to apply to all the Boards and upon which it would be desirable to reach agreement. In particular it seems clear that discussions about the Boards would soon touch upon some of those questions which were discussed between us at the time of the Article VII talks in the autumn of last year and the tentative conclusions then reached would clearly have to be taken into account when consideration was given to the future work of one or more of the Combined Boards.
We feel that it might be easier to discuss these general principles if United States, Canadian and United Kingdom officials directly concerned in the operations of each of the Boards first examined between themselves the problems likely to be faced by their respective Boards in the future and in particular in the period between the end of the German war and the end of the Japanese war (“Stage II”). Such examination should we hope, result in agreement at the working-level on the nature and substance of the work which each Board could do in Stage II and any adjustments in method of operation which might seem called for. It might also prove possible to give some indication of the commodities to which each Board considers it would be called upon to pay most attention in this period. One of the general questions which will fall to be considered is the manner in which the governments of certain of the United Nations who are not Members of the Board should be consulted. This question too could we believe be most easily dealt with if each Board could consider in the first instance which Governments it would from the practical point of view be most necessary to bring into consultation and also the manner of consultation which would best fit in with the operating machinery of the Board.
I understand that the officers of the Boards have in fact begun to discuss these and other questions informally. In view of these considerations I would like to suggest that the informal discussions which have been begun within the Boards should be continued with the idea of reaching provisional conclusions by say the 15th August. After that I suggest that it would be appropriate if the general questions arising could be reviewed by an informal group including representatives of the State Department, the Canadian Embassy, the British Embassy and the Minister Resident as well as of the Boards. The object of such a group as I see it would be to consider with representatives of the Boards, and against the background of their particular [Page 59] studies, the general principles which should apply to the future work of the Boards. Among the points which I presume would have, to be considered would be the scope and setting of the Boards within the general framework of continuing collaboration between the Member Governments, the relationship between the Boards and countries not represented upon them and the relationship between the Boards and any international commodity organisation which may subsequently be established. It would also fall to this group to see whether any of the conclusions reached by the individual Boards as to their own methods of work in Stage II were repugnant to the conclusions reached by the others.
If you should agree with this method of furthering the discussions started by the President and the Prime Minister I would be very glad to make the necessary arrangements on the United Kingdom side, and you might wish to consider a similar approach to United States members of the Boards.
I have discussed this informally with the Canadian Chargé d’Affaires who thinks that the suggested procedure would meet with the approval of his Government but is taking steps to confirm this.
In all the foregoing I refer only to the Combined Raw Materials Board, the Combined Food Board and the Combined Production and Resources Boards. It would not in my opinion be appropriate to include within the scope of these discussions either the work of the Combined Munitions Assignment Board or that of the Combined Shipping Adjustment Boards. The former is primarily an organisation established to deal with the allocation of war material and being linked closely with the decisions of the Combined Chiefs of Staff would fall outside the scope of these discussions. The latter can it seems to me also be omitted since the discussions which have taken place between our two Governments have already resulted in agreement on the future principles and machinery to be applied in handling the work of the Combined Shipping Adjustment Boards.
Believe me [etc.]