840.50 Recovery/8–2147: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Douglas) to the Secretary of State
4552. For Lovett. 1. I share your apprehensions that Paris Conference is not critically analyzing the estimated production and requirements of participating countries and that there is danger that final program may be both unrealistic as to production and inordinately large as to our assistance. (Department’s telegram 3596, August 20). Agree important all countries at Paris adjust their production programs to realities and critically screen each other’s requirements in order to keep demands on US at minimum. For example: French must be persuaded to abandon present position that original Monnet plan must be accepted practically unchanged no matter what the cost to US or to general recovery.
2. Did not intend to propose that production program for bizonal area be subject to any more rigorous screening than that of any other [Page 369] country. Question is not, it seems to me, one of submitting bizonal production program to Paris or permitting it to be discussed there, for both of these steps have already been taken.
3. Question seems rather to be one of participation of US Government representative aided of course by OMGUS staff in discussions on behalf US zone Germany in order that our program may be defended and that other countries may have an opportunity of pointing out to US as they will to each other changes in our program which would in their judgment contribute to reducing overall bill or to facilitating economic recovery of Europe as whole. Do not believe that in absence US delegate UK representatives are, or are considered by Paris conferees to be, adequate spokesmen for whole bizonal area.
4. To hold ourselves aloof from such give-and-take cannot help but encourage other participants to consider that their national plans and requirements should be accepted without examination or discussion. While we perhaps need not take the lead, neither should we hang back. We cannot in my view too promptly make it clear that we are prepared to participate in any overall program of critical analysis affecting all countries alike, though reserving, as each country must, the right of final decision in the light of all the evidence.
5. I recognize that US zone participation may carry implication that US is contributing directly and is accordingly committed to any program which may be formulated at Paris Conference but this danger can, I believe, be minimized, even completely removed.
6. Clay will arrive tomorrow morning. Will discuss this further with him and request him to transmit his views.
Repeated to Geneva 121 for Clayton and Paris 469 for Caffery.