Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, Central and Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume IV

460.509/7–1350: Telegram

The Ambassador in France (Bruce) to the Secretary of State

secret   priority

Paris, July 13, 1950—6 p. m.

243. Excon. Re Embtel 3199 June 29 repeated Copenhagen 36.¹

1. CoCom today considered Danish position. Department will appreciate unfortunate situation resulting from failure receive any reply to reftel sent almost two weeks ago requesting instructions on what we consider one of most important and delicate matters confronting US in whole CoCom and CG operation.

2. Danish delegation made following statement:

a. On entering CG Denmark stated its position in its November 1949 memo. It has however continued as member CoCom but experiences difficulty in implementing decisions because it abolished export controls February 1949.

b. Denmark not convinced that its export strategic items warrants restoration export controls. Should such controls be restored there would be political consequences in that present Danish Government is minority party and would be subject pressure from opposition. Furthermore restoration controls would give Danish Communists propaganda weapons government hesitates to give them. Danish statistics (airpouched today) indicate that in 1949 only $430,000 security items exported eastern Europe. Danes believe uniformity overstressed in CoCom and CG in that real sacrifices various PC’s not uniform.

c. Denmark’s position discussed with State Department which seemed to share view that it would be reasonable to undertake examination Denmark’s special situation (Department will recall that Copenhagen stated in its No. 4 July 3 to Department repeated Paris 3² that Denmark ForMin discussed Danish position with Secretary at London ForMin’s May conference and latter “expressed sympathy and agreement with Denmark viewpoint”. These statements complete surprise to Embassy in view previous Department cables this subject).³

3. Danish delegate summarized position by stating that when Denmark entered CG and CoCom it clearly stated the terms of Danish participation but that if future statistics showed exports security items to EE increasing they would reconsider their attitude.

4. French made strong statement saying Danish position not acceptable because even small leaks EE would defeat purpose Int list 1. UK supported French but as usual attitude was lackadaisical. Belgian, Canadian and Italian delegates supported French. Netherlands delegate expressed hope Danish Government would soon think exports excessive and stop them. Nevertheless said he would be compelled to abstain any CoCom recommendation this subject. Norwegian delegate conveniently absent.

5. At request Belgian, US, German, and UK delegates action on matter postponed one week. French and Italian delegates greatly concerned postponement stating informally that if PC’s accept Danish position they believed CoCom could not continue function as solid front would be broken.

6. Embassy reiterates its belief this problem important, delicate and urgent and would appreciate instructions soonest.

Sent Department 243, repeated info London 68, Copenhagen 3.

Bruce

1. Not printed. It observed that the Danish position on security export controls would shortly be discussed in the Coordinating Committee, and it pointed out the delicacy of the Danish situation involving as it did the Danish role as an active member of the Western community. It suggested that the United States content itself in the Coordinating Committee with reiterating the importance of the maintenance of a common front on security export controls (460.509/6–2950). In telegram 292, July 17, to Paris, not printed, the Department of State agreed that the problem of Danish cooperation was important and delicate and agreed on the position in the Coordinating Committee suggested by the Embassy (460.509/6–2950).
2. Not printed. It reported that Einar Waerum, Chief of the Economic Section of the Danish Foreign Ministry, had repeated at length all the previously expressed Danish arguments against an embargo policy on exports to Eastern Europe. Waerum stated that Danish Foreign Minister Gustav Rasmussen discussed the Danish attitude on trade controls with Secretary of State Acheson at London in May and Acheson had expressed sympathy and agreement with the Danish viewpoint. This had been a powerful influence on the maintenance of the Danish stand (450.6031/7–350).
3. Telegram 43, July 20, to Copenhagen, repeated to London and Paris, not printed, authorized the Embassy to inform Danish officials that it was Secretary Acheson’s recollection that in his conversation with Foreign Minister Rasmussen in London in May, he expressed sympathy for Denmark’s difficult position and agreed with Rasmussen’s position that it would be unwise to undertake a security export control program of such magnitude as to constitute a general embargo against Eastern Europe. Secretary Acheson did not agree that the American proposals for an expanded control program could be considered a general embargo or that Denmark should therefore abstain from participating in the joint control program as fully as possible (450.6031/7–350).