740.5/8–2451: Telegram
The United States Deputy Representative on the North Atlantic Council (Spofford) to the Secretary of State 1
Depto 271. Subjects of Depcirctel 141 and Todep 1132 discussed more fully with Shuckburgh today, brought out fol concerning UK thinking.
1. UK Govt had for some time been increasingly concerned by:
- (a)
- Preoccupation of NATO with mil to exclusion of non-mil aspects of Atlantic cooperation;
- (b)
- Thinking primarily in Fr of NAT as short-term enterprise in comparison with longer range “Eur framework” rather than as basis, to which UK attached utmost importance, for permanent US–UK–Eur cooperation;
- (c)
- Recent apparent weakening of NA concept due to considerations such as Greece, Turkey, Spain, etc.
2. Because of this FonOff and Morrison had at first felt strongly that Katz– Stikker –Marjolin project shld be brought out through NA Council rather than OEEC but had been convinced by arguments of other Mins at Strasbourg that positive emphasis on practicability and desirability of increased Eur def efforts shld come first from purely Eur group. They nevertheless still believe strongly that Council at Ottawa shld fol it up and more or less “take it over”. UK thinking on concrete steps to counteract trends referred to in para (1) had not crystallized but they had been thinking of proposing:
- (a)
- More frequent ministerial mtgs not only of Council as whole but perhaps also of different categories of Ministers with view to having some NATO ministerial mtg at least every two months;
- (b)
- Coordination of activities of NATO agencies (as is now underway);
- (c)
- Arrangements for Eisenhower to meet more frequently with CD in order to bring his stimulating influence more frequently and directly to bear on govts in other than strictly SHAPE matters.
3. He thought UK wld welcome strong statement by Secy of US interest in non-mil objectives and development of NA concept, as well as declaration of intention but referred to inevitable problem of getting 12-nation agrmt on really strong statement. He thought advisory sub-comite of Council on non mil objectives wld be desirable but was inclined to believe that big three shld be members to insure realism and weight in its recommendations. He said he had all along been seeking personally to assist development of CD exchanges of views on fon policy questions but that there was some opposition in FonOff on grounds of security, difficulty of serious discussion of major matters in such large group, and possibility of crossing wires with discussions of same subjects bilaterally or trilaterally. He personally believed these problems were entirely soluble and felt that we shld continue to stress non-binding nature of exchange of views on policy and avoid trying to reach formally agreed positions on papers.
4. In general he welcomed US line of thinking and expressed desire to explore subj further with us in next few days.