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

740.5 MAP/1–2150: Circular telegram

The Secretary of State to Certain Diplomatic Offices ¹

secret
priority

Washington , January 21, 1950—2 a. m.

ToMAP. Status bilateral agreements:

1. All questions of substance with Brit have been resolved except for granting diplomatic privileges and immunities to personnel in MAP section U.S. Embassy. Question is being considered by PriMin.² Brit also advise, contrary to previous position, that Brit, if agreement on personnel and final language reached, will be able to sign week of Jan 23 (Para III Depcirtel Jan 18³). Thus, Brit instructions today provide that agreement on facilities concerning which we may ask, as well as agreement on foreign project statement for increased production, are not conditions precedent to signature bilaterals.

2. As of Jan 20, Ital, Fr, Nor, Belg, Dutch, Lux Embassies had not yet received instructions to stand by terms of previous agreement, and not make changes in text as in Brit agreement, nor have they been advised as to which minutes agreed to with Brit should be adopted by them. Danish Embassy instructed not to accept Brit text agreement. You should reiterate request for most expeditious action as set forth in Para IV Depcirtel Jan 18.⁴

3. Re Para II–d Jan 18 Depcirtel,⁵ Dutch advise they can accept letter in substitution for old Para [Article] 7 (controls over exports war potentials) provided letter does not refer to consultative procedures Paris.⁶ Dept has requested Dutch Embassy to obtain authority to make such references, and has agreed that letter can indicate that purpose of meetings Paris are consultative and informal, and for making recommendations. Requested Embassy Hague present Dept’s position to Dutch.

4. Danes advise its Govt does not object to proposals contained in letter in substitution for old Para 7, but cannot agree to letter since they believe it would have to be made public. Since letter is merely a unilateral request for deletion old Para 7 and in effect constitutes a part of negotiating history, there is no need for making letter public, or for considering it secret agreement. Embassy Copenhagen requested to press this point to Danish foreign office.

5. For use Embassy Hague and Copenhagen, text proposed letter which addressed to Surrey⁷ as U.S. negotiator, and which will not be answered fols: Refers to proposal U.S. to have included in bilaterals Art VII Nov 2 draft, advises recipient govt in full accord with terms, refers to discussions held in Paris and progress made in those discussions with respect to estab and operation of permanent consultative group on estab control over export war potential materials. Letter assures intention of recipient govt cooperating further in operations permanent consultative group, and intention recipient govt to cooperate further in development such controls, and therefore, recommends for U.S. consideration deletion of art. Letter will not be answered, but Art 7 will be deleted. It therefore cannot be considered as constituting an agreement but is only a part of negotiating history.

Acheson

1. Sent to London, Paris (for Harriman), Home, Oslo, The Hague, Copenhagen, Brussels (and for Luxembourg), and HICOG, Heidelberg (for Handy).
2. British Prime Minister Clement R. Attlee.
3. Paragraph III not printed.
4. Paragraph IV not printed.
5. Paragraph II–d not printed.
6. For documentation on the activities of a permanent consultative group, established in Paris in November 1949 to discuss the export control of strategic resources and products in East-West trade, see Foreign Relations, 1949, vol. v, pp. 61 ff.
7. Walter S. Surrey, Acting Coordinator of the Foreign Military Assistance Program (FMAP).