740.5/6–2151: Telegram
The United States Deputy Representative on the North Atlantic Council (Spofford) to the Secretary of State
Depto 1158. From Spofford for Ambs Bay,1 Anderson,2 Chapin,3 and Murphy.4
1. Sensitive problem of East-West trade is before deps in form of res which USDep, supported by Brit, has introduced. In view nature of issue and fact that govts to which you are accredited have thus far not accepted US view wish to report present status to you for your gen info and for such support as you may be able to give to current negots.
2. Issue is whether or not CD shld now agree in principle that NAT countries shld deny to Sov bloc (through export embargo or other measures) materials declared by Def Production Board to be in critically short supply for NAT def purposes, subj to an exception protecting each country’s “security interests”. Specifically, following is key para in res which will be considered by CD June 25, in which alternative shown in parentheses is still being advocated by Norway, Den, Neth and probably Belgium:
- “Conclude: that, so long as items continue to be listed by DPB as being in short supply for NAT def purposes, their supply to Sov Union or areas under its domination or control shld be denied (it may be necessary to deny supply to Sov Union or areas under its domination or control) except to extent indicated by over-riding considerations arising out of security interests of exporting country concerned, term security interests being understood to include necessity to secure imports which must be obtained from Sov bloc to sustain basic econ strength of NAT countries”.
3. Under either form of this para, FEB wld be requested to take implementing action, and also to consider other measures which might [Page 1127] be taken “to increase availability of scarce materials to NAT countries and to assure that supplies which become available are devoted to most essential needs”. If res as proposed by US were adopted, FEB wld be expected proceed immed with reaching agreement as to specific embargo measures to be taken pursuant to CD declaration of principle, on understanding that if and when alternative measures (e.g., restrictions in non-essential uses) were taken to meet defense shortages, items concerned wld be dropped from DPB list and commitment to deny supplies to Sov bloc wld no longer be applicable. On the other hand, if alternative advocated by countries to which you are accredited were accepted, FEB wld merely be directed to consider necess of denying supplies to Sov bloc along with other possible measures for remedying def shortages. We believe that this wld inevitably mean that embargo action wld become last resort if no other remedial action proved feasible, and that long delays wld be encountered in reaching decisions.
4. Special attn is drawn to exception clause in res and to fol statement which I made in CD mtg of June 14, pointing out eventual right of each country to judge what its “security interests” demand.
“Finally, I shld like make clear that it is not intent of proposed res to commit each member country to deny to Sov bloc items listed by DPB unless and until positive action is taken by FEB to relieve country concerned of this commitment. Purpose of para 5 is merely to estab principle to guide FEB in securing prompt agreement among NAT countries as to specific measures to be taken. Member govts wld be accepting responsibility to justify in FEB, in terms of their “security interests”, any departure from gen agreed principle, but if after discussion in that body and full consideration of views advanced by other countries, a member govt persisted in believing that an exception to rule wld best serve its security interests, it wld not be committed by terms of proposed res to act contrary to its best judgment.”
5. We have been under pressure here to obtain NATO acceptance of principle of denial of East-West trade in critical items. US view is that with foregoing safeguard there is no legitimate reason for any NAT country failing to proceed with adoption of res in form US has proposed. In brief, we are merely asking NAT countries to terminate exports of scarce materials to the Sov bloc, so long as their “security interests” are not affected, unless and until other effective measures to meet def shortages are developed.
6. Hope foregoing is fully explanatory and that you may be able appropriately to indicate US interest in prompt solution and help support our position here.
Sent Oslo 241; rptd info Copenhagen 254, The Hague 331, Brussels 365, Department Depto 1158, Paris for King and OSR 2774.