840.50 Recovery/7–347: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Douglas) to the Secretary of State
3644. For the Secretary from the Ambassador. Mr. Bevin has asked me to send you the following report of yesterday’s meeting in Paris:
“The final meeting of the 3 Foreign Ministers took place today. Molotov adopted a completely uncompromising attitude towards the French proposal, churning out in even stronger terms than before the Soviet accusations that the preparation of an over-all programme meant that smaller European States were being subjected to Big Power domination and would involve interference with national sovereignty. He concluded with a warning to the British and French Governments that action, if persisted in, would have grave consequences. It would result not in the unification or reconstruction of Europe but in a division of Europe into two groups.
2. Bidault made a moving and eloquent reply in which he vigorously repudiated Molotov’s accusations and hurled back the gage by saying that it was Soviet Russia, by her action, which was dividing Europe into two groups.1
[Page 307]3. I said that Molotov’s statement was based on a complete travesty of the facts and entirely misrepresented the position of the British Government. Mr. Molotov presumably repeated misrepresentations like this in the hope that by constant repetition they would be believed. I referred to the high hopes with which we had come to Paris and to my own efforts in the past to ensure that Europe was not divided into two hostile camps. Our policy was to cooperate with all and dominate none. With regard to the division of Europe, nobody had striven more than I for the unity of Europe, including the political and economic unity of Germany. I noted and regretted that M. Molotov had ended with a threat. Great Britain on other occasions had been threatened with grave consequences. Such threats had not and would not cause us to hesitate to pursue what we considered to be our duty. Therefore, we intended to proceed with the line of action which we had advocated in as close association as possible with the United Nations and should keep other governments informed whether they could see their way open to cooperate with us or not. We hoped that by our work we should be able to refute the nasty suspicions expressed in the room today.
4. Molotov said that he hoped the world at large would acquaint itself with the proposals of all three delegations. After being assured by Bidault that the full texts of the various proposals would be published Molotov said that he would consider it his duty on his return to Moscow to report what had been said and done in Paris. Bidault remarked that the French Government felt bound to pursue the study called for by Marshall. I said that I would also report to His Majesty’s Government, and that I hoped we might yet find a common ground by which to lift Europe out of the misery in which war had left her. I added that I must make it clear that we intended to cooperate with such European states as were willing in the restoration of war-shattered Europe. The Conference then ended.
5. I am seeing M. Bidault early tomorrow when we hope to agree on a joint invitation to all European Governments (except Spain) to collaborate in appropriate degrees in the preparation of a reply to Mr. Marshall’s suggestion.
6. The most satisfactory feature of these talks has been that the French have been quite unwavering in their attitude on the basic issue and I am sure that we can count on the full collaboration of the present Government in the work which we are now setting in hand together.”
Mr. Bevin has informed me that he will be telegraphing to Washington the text of the invitation to European Governments as soon as this is agreed with M. Bidault today.
Mr. Bevin returns from Paris today, and I am seeing him at 6:15 this afternoon.
Repeated to Geneva for Clayton as 72.
- For texts of the statements made by Messrs. Molotov and Bidault at the July 2 meeting, see French Yellow Book, pp. 58–65.↩