743.5811/10–2750

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Perkins) to the Secretary of State 1

secret

Subject: Course of Action To Be Followed To Meet Spender’s Desire for Pacific Pact and Closer Participation in United States Military Planning Involving Australia and the Pacific.

Problem

When Spender originally brought forward last year his plan for a Pacific Pact, the emphasis was on obtaining some assurance that the United States would defend Australia in the event of aggression from Russia. This emphasis is no longer important in Spender’s or other Australian eyes since our defense of South Korea is more than ample proof to Australia that we would defend them if attacked. Thus, while Spender is still interested in the Pacific Pact, what he really wants is closer participation in all stages of high level Washington planning which might later involve the disposition of Australian forces or [Page 225] material. He uses as an example of Australian exclusion the fact that Luxembourg and Portugal, through the Atlantic Pact, participate in planning which may eventually involve Australian forces—(He doubtless has in mind that if the United Kingdom becomes involved in war long with other NAT countries, Australia will be called upon to assist, particularly in the Middle East.)

Another example advanced by Spender was that Egypt, through the Security Council, participated in planning which resulted in Australia’s sending forces to Korea while Australia has no machinery or channel through which it could make its influence as a Pacific power felt. Nearly all of the nations, even the smallest, have some machinery such as the Organization of American States, and North Atlantic Treaty in which to plan defense action with the United States, while Australia has none.

It is out of the question to make Australia a member of the Atlantic organization nor would Australia consider it sufficient to participate in the Atlantic Pact second-handed through the British (although they may do this too).

We believe that Spender’s and Australia’s needs would be substantially met if we were to accept in Washington a high level Australian military mission with perhaps a civilian or civilian members which had direct access to top echelons and participated in formulating decisions which involved its major interests.…

Recommendation

That EUR, with other interested Bureaus, discuss2 the Pentagon the acceptance of an Australian Military Mission.

  1. This memorandum, drafted by Livingston Satterthwaite, Deputy Director of the Office of British Commonwealth and Northern European Affairs, was concurred in by the Office of European Regional Affairs and the Bureau of Far Eastern Affairs. The source text bears the handwritten endorsement “Approved Dean Acheson.”
  2. At this point in the source text the phrase “with Spender and” is crossed out.