740.00/8–1150: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Consulate at Strasbourg 1


6. Views expressed in Deptel 5 were to give for your info and as background in informal conversations tentative views Dept on certain specific items known to be on agenda Council of Eur. They were not intended as instrs to you to raise with European delegs.

Although we wld obviously welcome development of Council of Europe into org which could effectively deal with specifics of furthering Eur unity, we do not feel that on evidence to date it has shown itself as effective as OEEC in dealing with concrete problems in economic field and wld therefore not favor having rivalry between two orgs result in action by Council of Europe in economic field which wld conflict with genuine progress being made in Paris.

As indicated para 2 Deptel, we believe unique contribution Council of Eur is as exclusively European forum in which public sentiment for greater unity can find expression and in which proposals which govts not yet prepared to adopt can be put forward by individuals and freely and fully discussed. In this way, Council can act as valuable catalyst and stimulant in economic and political as well as social and cultural fields. Reason for specific reference to latter in last para Deptel was that we felt less specific work so far undertaken by other orgs in this field left more room for direct action by Council of Europe.

Re Schuman Plan, we wld welcome comments Paris Emb but we have not understood from course of conversations of Six that is any official sentiment for using Council of Eur as common assembly envisaged by plan. Under Fr concept, common assembly is composed only of reps of countries which are signatories of treaty. Given tentative powers agreed upon for common assembly we believe limitation necessary. As indicated Deptel, unless instructed otherwise on basis of developments, we wish US reps at Strasbourg avoid any except most general comments on Schuman Plan. Wld appreciate full reports Schuman Plan debates and if specific comment even on personal and informal basis seems required will instruct you accordingly.

  1. The message was drafted by Miriam Camp of the Bureau of European Affairs and was cleared by John M. Leddy of the Office of International Trade Policy and with the Economic Cooperation Administration. It was repeated to Paris: as 781, to The Hague as 196, to London as 818, to Brussels as 198, to Rome as 633.