Office of the Historian

394.31/12–2751: Telegram

The Chargé in Belgium (Millard) to the Secretary of State

confidential
Brussels, December 27, 1951—7 p. m.

874. Re Embtel 854, Dec 21. Belg note recd requesting reconsideration of decision to modify US duty on hatters furs. Full text being despatched; synopsis follows:

1. Restatement of US proposal.

2. Belg Govt does not find that conditions precedent to use Art 19 have been realized because:

a.
Principal cause of distress of US industry is evolutionary tendency (as stated page 4 TC report) which was clearly perceptible in 1947.
b.
Per TC figures increase in imports greatly inferior to reductions US consumption and US production. Separate impact of increased imports cannot be considered serious injury because only 6 percent of total consumption.
c.
Per page 19 TC report, part of increase imports 1950 and early 1951 reflects accumulated stocks.
d.
TC figures do not provide convincing evidence imports wld continue to rise (or even maintain high level) unless concession modified.
(1)
Part of increase due to temporary stocking as reaction to Korean war.
(2)
According to commerce figures available to TC, March, May land July, 1951 imports inferior to same months 1950.
(3)

Belg statistics show decline in exports to US starting March, 1951 and indicate 1951 total will be less than ¼ 1950 total (Belg monthly figures enclosed).1

In conclusion, Belg Govt considers US import figures through Aug 1951 do not indicate serious and persistent menace and believes import experience Sept, Oct, and Nov 1951 will confirm its opinion and shld be taken into account in deciding on TC recommendations.

(4)
High duty on hat bodies established Dec 1950 will favor US fur industry by increasing its market; adoption TC recommendation wld provide additional protection before giving former advantage time to show its effects.

[Page 1558]

3. Belg Govt, therefore does not consider US industry is in exceptional circumstances contemplated by Art 19. Sec 7 TA Ext Act does not require TCC to prove all of exceptional conditions contemplated in Art 19. Therefore, TC report does not fully establish justification for Art 19 action.

4. If US Govt shld decide to carry out TC recommendation, notwithstanding foregoing considerations, Belg Govt wld appreciate knowing what disposition US will take to keep modification within limits prescribed by Art 19 “extent and time necessary to prevent or overcome the injury”.

5. Belg Govt reserves rights per 3 a Art 19 in case US carries out TC recommendations.

Millard
  1. Not Printed.↩