Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume V

ECA Telegram Files, Lot W–130, Paris Repto: Telegram

The Deputy Special Representative in Europe for the Economic Cooperation Administration (Katz) to the Administrator of the Economic Cooperation Administration (Hoffman)

[Extracts]
secret

Paris, November 25, 1949—5 p. m.

Repto 7579. Washington pass State, Commerce, NME. Reference Repto 7513,¹ Repto 7264,² repeated London Repto 975, Rome Repto 947, Brussels 445, Hague 514, Oslo 360, Copenhagen 303.

1. Final plenary session intergovernmental discussions security trade controls held November 23 and results considered satisfactory.³ Principle of multilateral action how accepted by all active participants (US, UK, France, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands) and activation permanent group approved for recommendation to respective governments. Delegations Denmark and Norway present final meeting but unable indicate more than attitude of sympathetic interest without further instructions from governments. Four reports approved by delegations above six countries for recommendation their governments are summarized below. Wright present final meeting and hand carrying all documents Washington today.

a. On commodity lists. Report stressed importance bringing Norway and Denmark into group, and of the institution of appropriate controls by Sweden and Switzerland and of resolving the position of Germany. Also stated that US delegation had submitted 35 commodities for embargo consideration. Commodities are enumerated on three lists. List 1 consists of 129 items upon which all participants agreed to recommend San embargo. List 2 contains one item recommended for quantity control. List 3 enumerates 12 commodities deferred for further technical review. Details regarding each of above three lists follow:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

b. On transshipment. Report unchanged from summary in Repto 7513, paragraph 3.⁴

c. On trade agreements. When definite undertaking in existence November 20 to supply security items recognized the obligation may have to be fulfilled, but every effort should be made by supplying country provide nonsecurity items if trade agreement category is broad enough. In negotiating future trade agreements no obligations should be undertaken supply items on agreed prohibited list, and obligations accepted under general headings should not involve commitments to supply such items. In addition to report all countries state strong efforts presently made to avoid commitments supply security items. Also emphasized verbally that lists and trade agreements inter-connected and that reservations for agreements should not be used to weaken lists.

d. On permanent group. Final report here differs from that approved preliminary meeting on subject. Re-examination proposed, report OSR and check opinion certain other delegations indicated advisability strengthening part on organization by more explicit references secretariat and committees. After informal clearance other delegations, ITS proposed amendment which was accepted all delegations except Netherlands. Latter accepted principle of continuing advisory group but withheld approval organization detail per US amendment on ground such organization now unnecessary and could be developed later by chairman as needs are shown. Netherlands delegate will obtain further instruction from his government. Report itself affirms need for continuing advisory group; recommends invitations to Denmark and Norway and participation by Sweden and Switzerland; provides for meeting as necessary in Paris; provides for work between meetings by chairman “in consultation representatives of governments concerned and with assistance of a secretary, an assistant secretary or secretaries together with appropriate working committees”; sets forth in general terms future functions of group, including implementation of controls and exchange of information.

Delegations agreed that decisions of governments regarding recommendations in reports would be transmitted to chairman in 15 days.

2. In addition approval above four reports following matters considered:

a. Submission by US of list 35 additional items mentioned, but no comments were made.

b. Norway and Denmark will report to chairman soonest on participation in security controls and in group.

c. Necessity for German participation agreed to, but method not decided, French stated opinion that controls now being instituted Germany would prove satisfactory, but felt that any German representation for present would be by High Commissioner not German Government. US and UK stated inability give opinion type of representation and would seek further instructions.

d. Importance control action by Sweden and Switzerland, especially in certain areas of commodities emphasized. No concrete suggestions made.

e. Next meeting of group scheduled for January 9.

Sent Washington Repto 7579; repeated Rome Repto 1009, The Hague Repto 548, Brussels Repto 468, London Repto 1037; pouched Copenhagen, Oslo, Frankfort, Vienna, Bern, Paris, Trieste, Stockholm, Moscow.

Katz

1. Not printed, but see footnote 3 below.
2. November 5, p. 169.
3. Telegram Repto 7405, November 14, from Paris, not printed, reported that the first meeting of the United States and Western European representatives regarding East-West trade controls was held at the French Foreign Ministry on the afternoon of that day. [The United States representatives at these meetings included Edwin M. Martin, Director for Regional Affairs, Department of State (from October 1949), Robert B. Wright, Economic Resources and Security Staff, Department of State, and Wallace S. Thomas, Deputy Assistant Director, Office of International Trade, Department of Commerce. Also participating in the meetings were representatives from the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Norway and Denmark were also represented, but the lack of timely government instructions restricted these representatives largely to observers’ status.] Hervé Alphand, Director General for Economic, Financial, and Technical Affairs, French Foreign Ministry, served as Chairman. At the initial meeting, the United Kingdom proposed the establishment of a Permanent Advisory Group which would meet as often as necessary to consider matters arising from the implementation of a common policy for the security control of exports. Italy, France, Belgium, and the United States expressed support for such a body, but the Netherlands would not agree. A review of the status of agreement on the Anglo-French list of October 14 (see footnote 2 to telegram Repto 6884, October 15, from Paris, p. 151) revealed that Belgium and the Netherlands had agreed to control all but a very few of the items on the list. The exceptions were, however, described as “disturbing” (ECA Telegram Files, Lot W–130, Paris Repto). Following several days of technical meetings involving British, Belgian, Dutch, Italian, and French representatives, telegram Repto 7513, November 19, from Paris, not printed, reported that agreement had been reached to recommend the embargo of 124 items on the Anglo-French list including the full electronics list. Prior to a final plenary meeting, United States representatives planned to consult with French Prime Minister Schuman, Belgian Prime Minister Van Zeeland, and Norwegian Minister of Trade Erik Brofoss regarding certain unresolved issues (ECA Telegram Files, Lot W–130, Paris Repto).
4. According to telegram Repto 7513, a committee of experts agreed upon the following recommendations on the transshipment problem: (a) that an investigation be made of the final destination of security items by the exporting country before a license is issued; (b) that the Permanent Advisory Group be provided information regarding the transit of security items across the territory of a member country; (c) that the governments study an appropriate system for the surveillance of security items transiting member countries; (d) the governments study an appropriate system for the surveillance of free zones and ports; (e) the governments study methods of obtaining the cooperation of Switzerland and Sweden in the solution of this problem; (f) that the governments examine the position to be taken vis-à-vis other countries.