840.50 Recovery/10–2649
The Minister in the British Embassy (Hoyer Millar) to the Secretary of State
secret
Washington, October 26,
1949.
Dear Mr. Secretary: Just after the Ambassador
had left for California yesterday evening we got a telegram from the
Foreign Office instructing us to communicate to you a personal message
from Mr Bevin on the subject of European economic collaboration.
A series of meetings begins in Paris this week of the Consultative Group
of the O.E.E.C., the Ministerial Council of O.E.E.C., the Council of
Ministers (European Assembly) and the Consultative Council of the
Brussels Treaty. It is likely that at all of these meetings the question
of European collaboration will come up in one form or another, and it
has, therefore, been thought desirable to consider the attitude which
the United Kingdom Government should adopt in such an event.
The line which the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr Bevin have decided
to recommend for adoption at the forthcoming meetings in Paris, and the
reasons for it, are set out in the form of the personal message for
yourself from Mr Bevin enclosed herein. We have been asked to explain
that it has not yet been possible for Mr Bevin and Sir Stafford Cripps
to show this message to the full Cabinet in London,
[Page 347]
though they hope to do so to-morrow.1 Should any change of
substance be made thereafter we will at once inform you.
It is not the intention of the United Kingdom Ministers to make any
formal statement of this kind during the meetings in Paris, though their
general attitude will be based on the policy set out in the message in
considering any proposals which may be put forward.
Yours sincerely,
[Enclosure]
Personal Message to the Secretary of State From
Mr. Bevin Dated 25th October,
1949
In preparation for the forthcoming meeting in Paris of the O.E.E.C.
Council of Ministers, the European Assembly and the Consultative
Council of the Brussels Treaty, His Majesty’s Government have
reviewed their general attitude towards proposals for closer
European union or unification which may be put forward.
In the first place, His Majesty’s Government re-affirm the
obligations which they have assumed under the Convention for
European Economic Co-operation, the Statute of the Council of
Europe, the Brussels Treaty and the Bilateral Agreement between the
United States and the United Kingdom.
In accordance with these obligations His Majesty’s Government have
participated fully in the O.E.E.C. and other European bodies and
have taken the lead in the elaboration of the practical steps which
have been taken, notably the Intra-European Payments Agreements and
measures for liberalisation of trade. They have been prepared to go
a long way and indeed to take considerable risks in order to promote
these and similar measures of co-operation. Proposals may now be put
forward which if they were to be accepted by His Majesty’s
Government might involve some degree of merging or integration of
the United Kingdom economy with the economies of Western European
countries. Although no actual proposals have been formulated, or at
least communicated to the United Kingdom, we have considered the
general principles involved. We must have regard to the position of
the United Kingdom as a power with world wide responsibilities for
administration and defence and as the leading member of the British
Commonwealth and sterling area as well as to the general
responsibilities which we have assumed under the North Atlantic
Pact, and the similar obligations under the Brussels Treaty.
Finally, we wish to do nothing which is incompatible with the
objectives of
[Page 348]
the
communiqué issued after the Anglo-American-Canadian economic talks
in Washington in September.2
In summary, the principal objective of our policy is to reconcile our
position as a world power, as a member of the British Commonwealth,
and as a member of the European community. We believe that we can
effect this reconciliation but that if we are to do so, we cannot
accept obligations in relation to Western Europe which would prevent
or restrict the implementation of our responsibilities
elsewhere.
In these circumstances, if proposals are put forward for closer
economic groupings in Europe or otherwise for the lowering of
tariffs in Europe and for the freeing of exchange and other
financial controls and restrictions in Europe we will examine them
sympathetically. We are in principle in favour of such groupings if
their establishment can be proved to be in the general interest of
European recovery. But we naturally expect that these proposals
should be clearly formulated and discussed with us so that we can
judge how they will affect our interests and can define our attitude
towards them. The decision whether we could support them generally
must depend on their nature and their possible effect on us and on
our wider responsibilities. We have neither the desire nor the
intention to impede any sound scheme of closer European union.
We believe that this general attitude coincides with that of the
United States Government and we hope that we may look to them for
their general support.
