611.5131/8–145
Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Arnold H. Quirin of the Division of Commercial Policy
| Participants: | M. de Fouchier, Assistant Director, Bureau of Foreign Economic Relations, French Ministry of National Economy, Paris |
| M. Treuil, French Commercial Counselor, New York | |
| M. Leroy-Beaulieu, French Supply Mission | |
| Mr. Cameron, American Embassy, Paris | |
| Mr. Domeratzky, Department of Commerce | |
| Messrs. Hannigan and Sheldon, FEA | |
| Mr. Bonbright, WE | |
| Mr. McVey,83 LA | |
| Mr. Hayes,84 LP | |
| Messrs. Brown, Phelps, and Quirin, CP |
Mr. Brown opened the meeting by explaining that the problem for consideration was the extent to which American exports to France might be restored to private commercial channels. At the present time practically all American exports to France are under the French national import program and are being purchased through government channels. French exports to the United States, on the other hand, are to be handled through private channels. Mr. Brown emphasized that we recognize the exchange problems of France and consequently acknowledge the need for regulating French foreign trade by a system of exchange control and licenses, but that we would like M. de Fouchier to discuss with us the possibility of restoring at least a part of American exports to France to private commercial channels.
M. de Fouchier replied that in principle France was anxious to resume private trade, but that it was his feeling that this resumption must be both gradual and within strict limits. He said that one of the chief reasons is that it is not practicable to have private imports of goods into France which are subject to allocations by the various [Page 766] Combined Boards, for private importers might not take up the entire allocations to France.
However, he felt that the possibility should be explored of establishing a short list of French import items which would be handled through private trade channels. He mentioned in this connection the informal arrangement concluded recently between France and the United Kingdom and indicated that it might be possible in a similar agreement with the United States to expand somewhat the number of items to be restored to private trade channels. He pointed out, however, that any purchases which would be restored to commercial channels must be carried on within the French Civil Import Program.
If it were possible to work out an agreement similar to that concluded with the British, M. de Fouchier indicated that he felt it would be useful to issue a press release emphasizing the limited scope of this type of trade.
Mr. Brown reiterated that we understand the necessity for exchange control and limiting imports to necessities, but we feel that this could be accomplished under a licensing system whereby trade would be restored to private channels.
M. de Fouchier replied that the need for more direct participation on the part of the French Government can be explained basically by the economic dislocation which exists in France at the present time. He said that the French industrialists fear the future and in general, are unwilling to assume the risks of private trading without government assistance. In fact, he expressed his opinion that, if left to private initiative, France’s essential import needs would not be filled. He also mentioned the French national program for industrial and agricultural modernization and said that he felt that Government purchases are necessary to carry out this program.
M. Leroy-Beaulieu commented that at the present time American exports to France were being financed under the lend-lease agreement and that in consequence public procurement through the French Supply Mission in the United States was necessary. Mr. Hannigan suggested that this problem might be solved if it were possible to transfer items appearing in the lend-lease schedules to a credit arrangement with the Export-Import Bank. He stated that he understood that this problem was under consideration.
Reverting to the need for government imports to implement the distribution system by government allocation in France, M. de Fouchiei stressed the urgent necessity for keeping imported goods and raw materials out of the black market. For that reason, he said he doubted whether an agreement could be reached with the United States on a much broader basis than that contained in the agreement concluded recently with the U.K.
[Page 767]Mr. Brown remarked that the U.K. agreement seemed to us to include a very small list of private trade items which were even further restricted by many exceptions to the list. M. de Fouchier replied that these exceptions in the British agreement had come from the British side as well as the French. In fact, the only exceptions which had been asked by the French were those relating to industrial equipment, machine tools, agricultural machinery, and trucks. He suggested that the list might be subject for consideration on his return to Washington. At the same time he spoke of the possibility of introducing as suitable for private trade those items which would go into reexports from France; i.e., principally raw materials and semi-manufactured goods.
In conclusion, M. de Fouchier stressed his belief in the usefulness of concluding even a narrow agreement which would restore a few items to private trade. He felt that this would be an initial step in starting France back in the direction in which he hopes it will go, that is, to private trade. In addition, it would afford the French Government an opportunity to try out private trade channels and see whether French needs could be filled in this way. He suggested that if the initial experience proves to be successful, the list of items under private trade could be gradually expanded.
[For a press release of September 7, regarding the restoration to private channels of certain United States exports to France, see Department of State Bulletin, September 9, 1945, page 358. This was an agreed press release. A simultaneous press release was issued by the French Government.]