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

740.5/12–850: Telegram

The United States Deputy Representative on the North Atlantic Council (Spofford) to the Secretary of State

top secret
niact

London, December 8, 1950—3 p. m.

Depto 295. Eyes only from Spofford. Concern indicated in Washington yesterday afternoon¹ over text paragraph 7(a) came as surprise to us. We were advised late night before that JCS approved it and were able communicate to Alphand only late yesterday morning. He personally considered it acceptable and agreed to recommend acceptance to his Government but in view long controversy on this subject, did not feel that he could definitely accept it without specific authorization. For security reasons he did not feel he could telephone text to Paris. Meeting was about to adjourn when we received Wright’s message through Richardson and had adjourned when MacArthur’s phone call received.² I accordingly summoned Alphand immediately and explained situation and urgency of final agreement. He agreed to attempt to secure it by phone.

Later in evening he telephoned me that Schuman would accept our 7(a) on condition we accept their proposal German RCT’s be attached to existing allied divisions. I told him this would be completely unacceptable, that their proposal could be discussed only in the military committee, that our 7(a) was not something which we wanted but something which we had gone to the furthest limit to meet their wishes and that all further progress with respect to meetings with military committee were dependent on his Government’s unconditional acceptance of 7(a). After much telephoning he advised me Schuman accepted 7(a) unconditionally but wished us advised that the French Government considered it essential that some mutually satisfactory solution be found at military committee meeting to problem of disposition of RCT’s during transitional period. I said we could give no commitment or indication as to what kind of solution on their proposal we might be willing to agree to but that we would advise Washington of their concern with it providing it was absolutely clear their acceptance 7(a) was completely unconditional. He confirmed that it was.

I have seen this morning message from General Bradley confirming request made yesterday that interpretation of 7(a) be cleared up on record this afternoon.

At beginning of meeting this afternoon I propose to recognize Alphand. He will say that French government accepts paragraph 7(a). He will follow this by statement that his Government does not envision use of German divisions to which I will reply that under paragraph 7(a) this is matter to be determined under circumstances existing at time, to which he will agree.

I will then state that a question of interpretation has been raised as to meaning of word “used” as it appears at end second sentence of 7(a) and I will make substantially following statement: “Our previous discussion of question indicates that word “used” is intended in sense of ‘combined with other units’ rather than in the sense of tactically employed. In other words question that must be determined in light of conditions at time is manner in which German RCT’s or brigade groups should be combined into divisions or other larger formations. It is not manner in which they may be tactically employed. I understand that this interpretation is agreed upon without reservation.” Alphand will confirm his statement given to me on several previous occasions that this is agreed to by French Government.

Alphand then proposes to say that his Government considers it essential that some means be found for avoiding surreptitious grouping of German RCT’s into divisions during initial period or for preventing them from being directly attached to German Government and that his Government favors attachment of these units to existing allied formations for this purpose, stating that they will bring this matter before military commission. All I propose to say on this is to recall previous meetings agreement that this matter was to be referred to Military Commission [Committee] for consideration.

Will telephone as soon as this part of meeting concluded.³

Sent Department Depto 295. Repeated priority info Paris 1123, priority Frankfort 591.

[Spofford]

1. Transmitted in telegram 3129, December 7 to London, not printed (740.5/12–750), this paragraph read:

   “The size of German formations to be constituted should not under present conditions exceed that of regimental combat teams or brigade groups. However, when these regimental combat teams or brigade groups are formed and trained, the question of the manner in which they should be used must be determined in the light of conditions at the time, due weight being given to the views of the Supreme Commander.”

2. Neither communication under reference here has been found in the Department of State files.
3. In his summary of the 41st meeting of the Council Deputies, in Depto 301, December 9, not printed, Spofford reported that the Deputies had approved the report with the action anticipated above (740.5/12–950).