394.31/9–2751: Telegram
The United States ( GATT ) Delegation to the Secretary of State
Tagg 40. Summary No. 8. Discussion Czech suspension began plenary the 26th to continue 27th. Tauber (Czech) requested permission speak first on point of order and tried again unsuccessfully have item withdrawn from agenda on grounds US proposal based on essentially political matters which CP’s not competent to judge.
Thorp’s presentation in Tagg 37. Indonesia, Ceylon, Sweden raised questions re appropriate GATT articles under which to take action or questioned lack of ref to any article in US declaration. Greek del supported US proposal, stating it eld understand US situation, pointing to decline in Czech-Greek trade and to fact that Czech had not respected obligations undertaken in trade agreement with Greece. Indian del, altho careful state not taking sides with econ system any one country, fully supported US proposal. Indian pointed out that proposal took practical view of situation which had to be recognized, that it was one of reciprocity, and did not affect obligations of either country with respect to other CP’s.
Danish del urged Czech to present case. Since matter of major importance and cld not be dealt with easily, Danish Govt wanted full explanation Czech views. Also asked that no decision be taken immed in order enable reporting back to govts. Latter suggestion supported by Indonesia.
Tauber asked and was granted permission to give speech two parts, view length proposed statement. First speech confined to comments on US presentation. Czech position on proposal to follow next mtg. Czech took exception to US statement that proposed action not unilateral and was based on reciprocity. Through embargo exports to Czech, US itself responsible for impairment of GATT benefits which Czech granted in negots. Stated no change in Czech econ policy since it became CP; as early as 1946 it adhered to principles now well known. [Page 1420] Claimed US had inaugurated cold war which it now asking CP’s to approve. In commenting on use Art XXV 5(A), Tauber referred to statement made by US at London preparatory mtg that we interpreted “exceptional circumstances” as econ hardships of temporary nature. Stated also US cld have presented complaint to Czech, under Art XXIII same way other countries have approached US on dairy products; CP’s cld have engaged in inquiry; and Czech wld have been ready to discuss. Felt main principles GATT wld be jeopardized if CP’s took advantage Art XXXV when differences arose between states. Claimed decline in US exports to Czech due to US action rather than econ change in Czech. Questioned statement Art XXXV not in force when Czech became CP; said Czech acceded April 21, 1949 and protocol including Art XXXV effective April 15, 1948. Stated proposed US action based on political motives incompatible Art 86 Havana Charter. In conclusion rptd charge that US had acted unilaterally to deprive itself of desired benefits.