862.60/7–2447
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Under Secretary of State (Lovett)
| Participants: | The Under Secretary |
| Sir John Balfour, British Embassy | |
| Mr. Graves, British Embassy | |
| Mr. Penson, British Embassy | |
| Mr. Matthews |
When Sir John Balfour finished discussing the Indonesian question43 I referred to the two letters he sent to the Secretary today on [Page 1007] the question of the German level of industry plan and the French protest regarding it.44 I said that we have given such thought to his communications as was possible in the brief time and that I should like to read him the conclusions which we had reached to date. I then read the following from Mr. Matthews’ memorandum:
“We do not feel that we can say anything more to M. Bidault at this time and that we believe that our message of July 21, which his Government has, should suffice for Bidault’s purposes for the next few days. If Mr. Bevin feels that he must send some further message to Bidault we hope that he will merely agree that there should be no implementation of the level of industry plan and no announcement of it for the present and that there should be consultation with the French. We hope Mr. Bevin will not find it necessary to be more specific as to the form of consultation until we can work out the form of consultation together with the British.”45
Mr. Penson took down the sense of this on paper. Neither he nor Mr. Balfour made any comment with respect to the subject other than to say they would forward it to Mr. Bevin immediately.46
In discussing the text of the British proposal I referred to the wording of paragraph (b) which reads as follows:
“(b) In the interval, the United States and United Kingdom Governments will be prepared to consider any representations that the French Government may care to make to them on the subject of the level of industry plan, although they cannot concede that France, not being a party to the fusion, has an equal right with themselves to determine the level of industry in the bi-zonal area, especially having regard to the financial drain upon them.”
I said that since the purpose behind our recent efforts was to calm down French sensibilities I felt that this paragraph, if communicated to the French, would have the opposite effect. Mr. Balfour agreed and said that it had struck him the same way. He went on to say that Bonnet had told him that he expected “tripartite consultations” between [Page 1008] the three Governments on the level of industry would begin in a week or so and that he had seemed very pleased with Secretary Marshall’s message to Bidault. We said that there had been no assurances to M. Bonnet that the consultations would necessarily be tripartite nor did we know definitely what was the French desire.
We pointed out that paragraph (c) of the British communication seemed to visualize nothing more than an acceptance of separate French representations to our two Governments. We did not believe that this would satisfy the French and Mr. Balfour agreed. It was left that he would query his Government as to whether and where and in what form the British visualized consultation with the French. I said that meanwhile we would try to clarify our own thinking on this. Mr. Balfour did not believe his Government would favor having any such consultations in Paris in view of the possibility of confusion with the 16–nation conference.
I also referred to the date of the beginning of September in the British letter and said that I thought it was inadvisable to pin ourselves down at this stage to a definite date. Mr. Balfour agreed.
- The record of the discussion regarding Indonesia has not been printed. For documentation regarding the concern of the United States over the nationalist opposition to the reestablishment of Dutch rule in the Netherlands East Indies, see volume vi .↩
- One of the letters of July 24 from Balfour is printed supra. In his other letter to Secretary Marshall, not printed, Balfour transmitted Foreign Secretary Bevin’s suggestion that the British and American Commanders-in-Chief in Germany should be instructed that, when replying to any questionnaires they may receive from the Conference of European Economic Cooperation in Paris, they should base their answers on the new level of industry plan (862.60/7–2747). This was, in fact, done.↩
- The quotation printed here is virtually the entirety of a memorandum prepared by Matthews for Under Secretary Lovett, dated July 24, giving the sense of a meeting of Departmental officers in Assistant Secretary Hilldring’s office on the morning of July 24 (862.60/7–2447).↩
- On the afternoon of July 25, the British Embassy informed the Department of State that Foreign Secretary Bevin agreed with the message sent to him by Minister Balfour following this conversation with Under Secretary Lovett that no consultations should be held with the French regarding the level of industry until American and British officials had worked out the form under which this consultation would take place. Memorandum of conversation by C. Tyler Wood, July 25, 1947 (711.51/7–2547).↩