Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, Western Europe, Volume III

740.5/11–850: Telegram

The Chargé in Belgium (McClintock) to the Secretary of State

top secret

Brussels, November 8, 1950—5 p. m.

721. 1. Belgian press this morning carries Reuter despatch from London quoting “authorized source” that plenary meeting of ministers of foreign affairs of NATO Council has been scheduled for mid-December in Brussels.

I asked Van Zeeland this morning if this report was correct. He said that plans had not crystallized nor was he in position to make any official statement,¹ but that in effect he thought his colleagues on NATO Council were in general agreement that it would be helpful to have such a meeting in Brussels early in December. He said he understood Department’s position (Deptel 557, October 30,² repeated London 2229, Paris 2278) that his suggested date of November 15 was perhaps premature.

2. Since Van Zeeland has been obviously eager to play role of go between in current impasse between US and French positions on NATO defense, and since as chairman of NATO Council he has a certain role to play, I permitted him to read intel of November 5, 1 a. m.,³ which sets forth US position very forcefully and clearly, in order that he should be under no misapprehension as to our views.

Van Zeeland said that he understood US point of view and completely agreed with it. He particularly stressed paragraphs 8 of reftel and said he envisaged task of other NATO partners as one of reconciling differences between US and French positions. He said that progress had been made in this direction in Rome and cited as an example a report he received that French were not insistent on limiting German units only to battalion strength but might be willing to consider units larger than this but less than of divisional strength, a compromise being worked out along lines of “combat teams”, “task forces”, or any other phraseology contemplating units larger than a regiment.

3. Throughout conversation Van Zeeland stressed his faith in Schuman’s sincerity and his regret that it had not been Schuman but Moch who presented French views in Washington. He said he had already informed Secretary on behalf of Schuman that latter would not insist on any specific French proposal for defense of Western Europe if it would delay creation of tangible defense forces by even one week.

4. Van Zeeland asked if Spofford were in London. He said he thought lie might be able to be helpful if he had chance to talk with Spofford and attempt to work out in black and white some compromise suggestions. For this reason he said (reEmbtel 716, November 7⁴) that he did not desire to take any position of partisanship for US plan or complete opposition to Pleven plan since as he visualized problem it was one of preventing national positions from becoming crystallized, of saving face, and of working out compromise in best interest NATO.

Sent Department 721, repeated information London 119, Paris 153.

McClintock

1. Van Zeeland assumed Chairmanship of the North Atlantic Council after the lose of the September session in New York.
2. Not printed.
3. Circular telegram to Brussels, Copenhagen, The Hague, Lisbon, Moscow, Oslo, Ottawa, Reykjavik, and Rome (passed to Luxembourg from Brussels), not printed. This telegram repeated the views expressed in telegram 2377 to Paris, November 3, p. 426.
4. Not printed.