740.5/8–1550: Telegram
The United States High Commissioner for Germany (McCloy) to the Secretary of State
priority
1327. Eyes only for Acheson and Foster. I am greatly disturbed at reports I have heard that ECA policy as outlined in a contemplated circular to missions is that nothing should be done in regard to rearmament which may in any way interfere with existing living standards or present economic development, a line which is generally in accord with the London Times editorial of August 4.
In my judgment this is the most ineffective approach imaginable at this stage in world history. It discloses an utter lack of appreciation of the necessities. It is the same shallow and wishful thinking that marked the old “business as usual” slogan of the British in the fall of 1914, and its effect this time may be even more tragic. The idea that Europe can rearm effectively without real sacrifice is sheer nonsense. This circular seems to imply that the only sacrifice contemplated is some slowing down of anticipated improvements in the future. We cannot sensibly continue to pour money into Europe for economic rehabilitation without adequate strength to protect it, and all indications are that there is not enough time to permit such strength to be created after full economic objectives are achieved. Unless Western Europe faces the facts and the need for real sacrifices we shall not acquire any real strength.
In my judgment the size of the problem is such that the US is incapable of taking on the burden of the world-wide rearmament and full economic rehabilitation at the same time. Moreover if the European [Page 673] countries feel that no sacrifices need be made they will not take the unpalatable measures which effective rearmament demands. The note which must be struck at this time is one of sacrifice and tough sledding with a willingness on the part of the US to help if such policy is adopted.
For the first time in many months there have been signs of a growing will to make sacrifices in order to achieve a real measure of defense and one to replace the pure facade we have thus far had. It is this spirit which must be encouraged, whereas it would only be weakened by further talk of business as usual. It is most important that ECA should not instruct its missions at this time in any other vein if we are serious about the defense of Europe.