740.00119 Council/2–2447: Telegram
The United States Deputy for Germany at the Council of Foreign Ministers (Murphy) to the Secretary of State
1226. Delsec 1268 from Murphy. Your 869, February 21 Secdel 1304.68 We are grateful for Department’s advice regarding the recommendations on machinery for consultation with other states and we have presumed throughout that final determination of exactly how many and which states will be represented on committees is a matter which CFM will eventually decide.
As the Department will have noted we have consistently through the weeks of discussion whenever the question of participating states has arisen made it abundantly clear that we do not agree with the Soviet proposal to limit these states to a total of twelve including Albania and have insisted on a minimum of eighteen excluding Albania. Department has been informed that an agreement by the Deputies at this session adjourning February 25 on the points mentioned by Department seems hardly possible.
Since the Department’s dispatch of its present telegram there have been further developments in respect of the British proposal which it is suggested we now support. We have never been very far apart from the British but it should be mentioned that according to Strang, the British representative has been constantly prodded by the Dominions to stand for broad participation of the allied states, possibly good deal broader than the UK by itself would have been prepared to go.
[Page 39]Department will note that two features are left in doubt by text of the British proposal: (A) The manner of selection of the representatives of the allied states and (B) definition of “direct interest”. In respect of (A) we have felt that the selection would be facilitated if each deputy could select one thus providing a basic membership of eight with additional members required to be selected by joint action of the four. With respect to (B) we have maintained that the CFM in extending its invitation for hearing on December 31 to the eighteen states provisionally decided these eighteen had a “direct interest” Soviet definition would limit them to “allied neighbor states and those who were occupied by German forces”, thus making a total of twelve including Albania. We have suspected that Department might find difficulty regarding Latin-American and Near Eastern countries and for that reason have tried to obtain greatest latitude.
As matters now stand there is practical agreement by UK, French and this delegation on recommendation to CFM for establishment of information and consultation committee as well as for the following: (A) Committee for the political and Constitution Organization of Germany; (B) Committee for Territorial Changes and Related Questions; (C) Committee for the Economic Organization of Germany and Reparations, (D) Committee of Disarmament and Demilitarization. There is also substantial tripartite agreement on the appointment of sub-committees “as and when necessary to examine particular questions”.
We shall bear in mind the formula suggested for the composition of the committees but we do not expect agreement. The Soviet representative has steadfastly opposed a degree of participation by allied states which would permit their membership in committees or subcommittees for the consideration of particular subjects. The UK representative bolstered by the Dominions’ representative now insists on such membership and we have taken the same position. Couve would like to straddle not demonstrating firm convictions but now says that it is obvious that Gusev will not budge. Couve, therefore, indicates he will come along with the UK and US views.
- Supra. ↩