840.20/9–748
Memorandum of the Fourteenth Meeting of the Working Group Participating in the Washington Exploratory Talks on Security, September 7, 1948
Mr. Kennan opened the meeting by inviting the attention of the members to a revised draft of the section of the paper entitled “Territorial Scope of North Atlantic Security Arrangement and Its Relationship to the Security of Other Nations”.1 Mr. Wrong confessed that he was not clear in his own mind regarding some of the provisions in the paper and inquired whether Italy, for example, by acceding to the Brussels Treaty at some future date, would automatically become a member of the North Atlantic security arrangement. In reply, Mr. Achilles said that such membership would not be automatically conferred in this manner, but that on the other hand, to use the same example, Italy, by joining the Brussels union would obtain in effect a sort of secondary, contingent guarantee of her integrity, by virtue of certain mutual guarantees existing between the United States and the Brussels Pact countries within the North Atlantic arrangement. Mr. Hoyer Millar thought that Italy rightly belonged among the Category 2 nations for, as in the case of Iceland, it probably would be in position only to offer bases and facilities. Mr. Berard agreed with Mr. Helb2 that admission to the Brussels Treaty should not be made a pre-condition for membership in any North Atlantic security arrangement. Continuing, he suggested that the inclusion of the United States and Canada, the Brussels countries, and the so-called “stepping stone” countries, would be the essential minimum for the creation of the pact under discussion; the absence of any of these states would make impossible the formation of the kind of security arrangement which the present Talks contemplated. Once the aforementioned countries had formed this union certain other states, which might be defined as not being “natural members of the North Atlantic community”, such as Sweden, Italy, and perhaps Western Germany and Austria, might be [Page 235] admitted under certain prescribed conditions. In this connection Mr. Achilles expressed the opinion that Italy probably would wish to enter the security arrangement as a full member.
Mr. Helb pointed out that in the Annex of the paper mention was made for the first time of a security area, and he suggested that some earlier reference to this subject be inserted in the paper. While in agreement with this statement, Mr. Wrong anticipated that considerable difficulty would be encountered in endeavoring to delineate a security zone.
Mr. Hoyer Millar thought that the draft paper under discussion did not make clear that nations admitted into the second category of membership would not have the individual right to do nothing whatsoever in the event of hostilities; on the contrary, they should be obligated to defend their territory. Mr. Kennan suggested also that the draft paper when revised should indicate that nations which might later apply for admission to the North Atlantic security arrangement should be permitted to enter on the basis of one of the categories if they were able and willing to meet the prescribed conditions of that category, and if such conditional admission were acceptable to the existing members of the group.
Mr. Henderson said that it appeared that two principal revisions should be made in the draft paper, namely, that Brussels Pact membership as a pre-condition to admission to the North Atlantic security arrangement should be eliminated; and, secondly, that provision be made requiring nations in Category 2 to defend themselves to the extent of their abilities. Mr. Wrong believed that paragraph 5 of the Annex in the main paper could also be improved in language. Mr. Kennan suggested that the reference in the draft paper to certain countries not being permitted to participate in the military planning committees should be redrafted.