Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, Western Europe, Volume IV

840.00/2–1649: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom

top secret

Washington, February 16, 1949—7 p. m.

554. Eyes only Douglas. Foreign Assistance Correlation Committee considering draft interim instructions to USRep to Western Union Military Supply Board. Your comments urgently requested.¹

“I. Background and General Instructions:

U.S. participation in the deliberations of the military agencies established pursuant to the Brussels Treaty is on a non-membership basis. It involves participation at all stages in drawing up a coordinated military supply program in which with respect to the West Union nations:

(1) they must first plan their coordinated defense with the means presently available; (2) they must then determine how their collective military potential can be increased by coordinated production and supply, including standardization of equipment; (3) we would then be prepared to consider and screen their estimates of what supplementary assistance from us was necessary; (4) we would expect reciprocal assistance from them to the greatest extent practicable; and (5) legislation would be necessary to provide significant amounts of military equipment but the President would not be prepared to recommend it unless the foregoing conditions had been met.

The instructions to the USRep on the Permanent Military Committee (JCS–1868/11 and NSC 9/4²) from which the foregoing quotation is taken should be followed insofar as applicable by the U.S. participant in the work of the Mil Supply Board. The work of the Board is expected to be concerned primarily with (2) above. In matters relating to standardization, the Supply Board will handle matters relating to production. Its terms of reference are understood to be: (a) to advise the Defense Ministers on all questions affecting military supplies; (b) to arrange for assembly and collation of requirements estimates in weapons and equipment of the forces which the Five Powers decide should be raised and maintained for common defense; (c) to ascertain and report to the Defense Ministers what can be done to meet these requirements; and (d) to seek advice for these purposes from the Chiefs of Staff Comm. and to give the latter in brief any advice it needs on supply questions.

The legislation mentioned in (5) above has top priority on the legislative programs of both the Dept of State and the NME for the 81st Sess of Congress. However, both the likelihood of such legislation being passed and the size of appropriations for its implementation will be materially influenced by the reaction in Congress to such information as may be available concerning the willingness and ability of the recipient nations to help not only themselves but also each other in order to reduce to a minimum the supplemental assistance they may find it necessary to request from us. It has constantly been made clear to them, and must constantly be reiterated, that U.S. assistance can only supplement and can in no sense replace the maximum efforts of the recipients to help themselves and each other in a manner consistent with the achievement of a sound Eur economy.

We are not thinking in terms of ‘lend-lease’ but of ‘mutual aid’. By the latter we mean a coordinated program under which each participant contributes what it most effectively can in manpower, resources, productive capacity or facilities to strengthen the defense capacity of the entire group. This naturally covers (4) above.

In the West Union countries generally, rearmament will require some increase in domestic expenditures for military purposes. It may call for some diversion of resources from recovery programs. However, a successful program of common defense with U.S. participation and assistance may bring a degree of security which could not be attained in any other way and which should facilitate recovery through increased confidence.

On the other hand it is our policy that economic recovery must not be sacrificed to rearmament and must continue to be given a clear priority. Exceptional circumstances may justify, in the light of overall U.S. interests, departures in particular cases from the rigid application of the foregoing policy, but in principle rearmament expenditures and manpower diversion should not be permitted to bring about any serious reduction in the allotment of Eur resources to the recovery effort. Financing of such expenditures should not be permitted to delay successful completion of financial stabilization measures in participating countries or to upset the operations of the Intra-Eur Payments Scheme.³

It is equally important that in the development of a rearmament program for Western Eur, due consideration be given to the limits of U.S. financial and material aid available. Thus, a balance should be struck between the needs of our domestic economy, our own rearmament, our contribution to Eur Recovery and our contribution to Eur rearmament. The West Eur countries should not formulate a program of rearmament of substantially larger dimensions than the Eur or U.S. economies could support under the principles outlined above. The adverse psychological effect on the West Eur if a program agreed by their military leaders could not be met would in itself be a serious deterrent to economic recovery and political stability and would be a boon to the USSR.

It is, therefore, considered important that U.S. reps participate fully in the development of a West Eur rearmament program to ensure that the end product is realistic, having in mind Eur and U.S. resources, as well as the maintenance of a proper relationship to economic recovery programs. Further guidance on the limits within which the program must be fitted will be sent you from time to time.

The President has directed that the Secy of State coordinate the development and presentation to the Congress of the overall foreign military assistance programs, of which the strengthening of the Western Eur nations forms a part. This coordination will be carried out in Washington in the closest cooperation among the Dept of State, the NME and the ECA. You are responsible to and will receive instructions from the Secretary of Defense, operating within this coordinating framework.⁴ In Eur coordination will be achieved through a correlation committee⁵ under the chairmanship of the Amb to the UK as the representative of the Secy of State in his capacity as Chairman of the Foreign Assistance Steering Comm, and with the USRep on the West Union Chiefs of Staff Comm, the USRep to the Fin & Econ Comm, the US Special Representative in Europe and yourself as members. To facilitate such coordination, copies of all recommendations made by you in accordance with the instructions in (II) should be supplied to Amb Douglas.

II Specific Instructions:

In appropriate collaboration with the Correlation Comm you will:

(a) Furnish appropriate advice to the West Union Military Supply Board with the object of assisting West Union countries in meeting requirements.

(b) Keep the Secretary of Defense informed on Supply Board activities, including aid which may be required from the U.S.

(c) Advise the USRep on the West Union Chiefs of Staff Comm as to the practicability of meeting such requirements from U.S. production based on information to be supplied by the Munitions Board.

(d) Make recommendations to the Secy of Defense, attention the Munitions Board, as to the capability of and adequacy of measures taken by the West Union countries to meet requirements, including production techniques, etc.

(e) Recommend to the Secy Defense, alternate possibilities by which supplementary requirements might be met, such as augmentation of West Union munitions producing facilities, third country sources of the supply, etc.

(f) Make recommendations to the Secy of Defense as to exchange of information on production techniques, designs, etc., and assignment of research and development projects.

(g) Recommend to the Secy of Defense specific measures of reciprocal assistance, other than military, which might be sought from Western Union countries.

(h) Ensure, insofar as practicable, that equipment requested of and to be supplied by the U.S. should be in accordance with U.S. standards.”

Douglas pass to DelWU. Repeat to Paris 498 (Harriman) for information and urgent comments.

Acheson

1. Douglas commented on this telegram and on the more detailed instructions of the Department’s telegrams 550 and 555, also of February 16, in his telegram No. 647, February 22, 1949. Telegrams 550, 555, and 647 are in Department of State file 840.00.
2. Neither printed. For a text similar to NSC 9/4, see Foreign Relations, 1948, vol. iii, p. 189.
3. For documentation on this subject, see pp. 367 ff.
4. Reference here is to the Foreign Assistance Steering Committee. See January 9, Repsec 8, footnote 2, p. 14.
5. The European Correlation Committee (ECC).