840.50 Recovery/7–147
Memorandum of Conversation, by the First Secretary of Embassy in the United Kingdom (Peterson)
Main Points in Discussions of Under Secretary Clayton and Ambassador With British Officials regarding Aide-Mémoire for Foreign Secretary re Marshall Plan
This discussion on the afternoon of June 25 was held at the Embassy. Sir Edward Bridges, Sir Wilfrid Eady (Treasury) Sir Percivale Liesching (Food), Sir John Henry Wood (Board of Trade), Sir Edmund Hall-Patch (Foreign Office), Mr. R. W. B. Clarke (Treasury) attended. Mr. Peterson and Mr. Gunter were present from the Embassy.
The British distributed a memorandum entitled “Summary of Discussions with Mr. Clayton”1 which was being prepared for guidance of Mr. Bevin in his Paris talks. Most of the discussion concerned changes in this paper.
Mr. Clayton thought it inadvisable to even mention “Lend Lease” in Paragraph VIII. He said that influential people in the US insist that the Marshall Plan should contain some reciprocal economic considerations from Europe; for example, items for stockpiling in the United States. Stockpiling operations were likely to commence soon. These operations would encompass US acquisitions over and above normal requirements; purchases would be outright and dollars paid to Europe, thus feeding European dollar needs. In response to a question, Mr. Clayton said stocks thus acquired would be “locked up” and not released into current demand although the legislation provided for some turnover of stocks to prevent depreciation.
[Page 284]Mr. Douglas suggested a phrase in the part of Paragraph VIII to the effect that “although in appropriate instances the US Government may seek some sort of commodity considerations related to strategic stockpile programs”.
Sir Edward Bridges then outlined the purpose of the document being considered. It would be useful for further discussion with Ministers and also useful to Mr. Bevin. There would be no publicity and it was agreed that the publicity question was important. Mr. Clayton said most of his views came out of his own head as he had only one talk with the Secretary and this concerned chiefly the coal problem. Mr. Clayton did not want to give the impression he had laid out any well thought-out plan or scheme. The Planning Staff was hard at work in the Department under George Kennan and when they completed their studies there might well be some alteration in the viewpoint which Mr. Clayton had outlined in a most preliminary way.
Mr. Douglas asked Sir Edward Bridges to confirm his understanding that the aide-mémoire did not constitute an agreement. Sir Ernest [sic] concurred and described the document as simply a statement along informal lines of the subjects of British and American thinking. A new heading to the document would make this clear.
Numerous other drafting and substantive changes were made in the Statement. These will be apparent from a comparison of the first draft and the final draft reviewed at 10 Downing Street, June 26. This included a new paragraph suggested by the Ambassador regarding financial stability and budgetary affairs.
In the section of Paragraph VIII which was redrafted as “The first reaction of UK officials”, Mr. Peterson asked if the British might desire to redraft the penultimate paragraph regarding the difficulties of integrated European production to include the idea that this subject might be considered and discussed at Geneva by delegations of European countries now considering trade policy. Sir John Wood said the British did not contemplate this approach, but that officials of the Board of Trade were looking into the general question of aid to Europe separately from the consideration given to ITO.
- Copy attached to original only. [Footnote as in source text; the memorandum referred to, which is in the Department’s files, is not printed, but a subsequent draft is printed infra.]↩