Brussels Embassy Files: Telegram1
Mr. Edmund A. Gullion, Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of State (Lovett), to the Embassy in Belgium
Unnumbered. For the Ambassador from Gullion in New York. Reurtel 1688.2 Essence Spaak conversations here is, as reported first paragraph your 1617, October 17.3 In conversation with secretary he reiterated opinions known to you, referring to increasing difficulties being caused by communists, and stating that as duration of agreement was only real secret, he saw no objection to making whole agreement public. However, in conversation with both Secretary and Under Secretary he said that he would not press point. He seemed confident he could handle communists and unworried by their pressure.
Reports in Belgian press of early realization of industrial uses in United Kingdom had intensified public pressure on him and he thought time had come to begin giving effect to section 9 (a) and for him to be able to say that Belgian interests were being safeguarded. In this connection, he referred to possibility of building pile in Britain for Belgian account which scientists had assured him was practicable. He had not discussed this with British.
Secretary assured Spaak of his understanding of Spaak’s position and of communist pressure. Any public statement would have to be very carefully worded to minimize possible propaganda advantages to USSR. As to construction of piles he had during war heavy personal responsibilities in this field. He had not been happy over projects for pile in UK. He referred to invaluable protection afforded by Atlantic.
In conversation with the Under Secretary at Belgian Embassy dinner, Spaak took somewhat similar line. The Under Secretary assured him our great appreciation of his steadfastness and referred to difficulties our own position, including McMahon act. Nevertheless we would carry out our obligations in agreement.
The Under Secretary had earlier given Spaak a pre-release text of address on industrial uses by David Lilienthal which made clear that these were extremely remote even in this country and referred to unjustified hopes which existed abroad and were exploited by certain interested parties. This seemed to bring situation home to Spaak more completely than our previous explanations have done. Spaak also was [Page 852] told that our scientists thought that the idea of piping power to Belgium from pile in Britain was fantastic.
After high level consideration, plans mentioned in Millard’s letter to Gullion of October 16 were not discussed.4 These plans are going forward and you will be informed.
No decision yet taken on any text of new declaration by Spaak,5 but course suggested second paragraph your 1617 seems satisfactory. Your report of luncheon conversation will be helpful in this regard but do not believe you should raise question of new statement. For your own information, if Spaak is compelled to make further declaration, we believe it might go as far as that set up for Sengier in your 1766, October 31 [December 31, 1946],6 disregarding change suggested by Department in its 46, January 15.6 This cannot be confirmed immediately, and also for your own information, forthcoming meeting on plans mentioned by Millard’s letter in reference may have bearing on decision. Will try to send further views first part of next week.
Sengier’s conversations here on similar lines. He and commission have made mutually satisfactory new arrangements for further quantities of raw material at higher price. Details follow. Sengier did not mention question of new statement to Department although he did speak of it to Commission. Belief here is that original statement in your 1766 December 31 is satisfactory to him and to us.
- Lot 56F191, files of the United States Embassy in Belgium.↩
- In telegram 1688 from Brussels, October 30, Kirk requested urgent telegraphic summaries of Spaak’s conversations with the Secretary and Under Secretary (855.6359/10–3047).↩
- In telegram 1617, Kirk reported the account Spaak had given him of his conversations in the United States (855A.6359/10–1747).↩
- Hugh Millard, Counselor of the Embassy in Belgium, had requested information on the status of the recommendations contained in “your [Gullion’s] memorandum.” Reference was presumably to PPS/11, October 24, p. 844. (Brussels Embassy Files)↩
- Kirk had reported Spaak as stating that he expected the Communists in the lower house to emphasize in imminent interpellation the vast quantities of uranium being sold to the United States. Spaak intended to discount extravagant production figures and if pressed to state merely that all have read what the newspapers have published. (855A.6359/10–1747)↩
- Not printed.↩
- Not printed.↩