CFM files, lot M–88, box 159, documents OTT D–la–D–10
Memorandum by the Deputy Director of the Office of European Regional Affairs (Parsons) to the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Perkins) and the Director of International Security Affairs (Cabot)1
Council of Deputies Resentment of Standing Group Refusal To Attend Ottawa Meeting
Depto 298, August 30,2 commenting on the rather bitter debate (Depto 297, August 303) which ensued following General Lindsay’s statement on behalf of the Standing Group, points out that the situation [Page 260] which has arisen “merits the personal attention of senior U.S. officials in State, Defense, SHAPE and of Admiral Wright”.
The Standing Group position is based upon the view that it would be premature to take up military questions at Ottawa. Even though the Standing Group is in full agreement on it, their position is the position which our own military has held most strongly and which necessitated the understanding between the Secretary and Mr. Lovett before Defense agreement to holding the Ottawa meeting could be obtained. It appears that the Standing Group as well as the Department of Defense hold to the view that military matters should not come up, rather than to our understanding that they should not come up for action.
There are at least two serious implications to the current controversy in the Deputies. The first is that added impetus has been given to the desire for more adequate civilian control over the military side of NATO. The second is that impetus has also been given to the desire of the smaller countries to have a greater voice in military decisions affecting their own security, or alternatively to be assured that their interests, sensibilities and own domestic political problems will be taken into consideration and handled on a more understanding basis.
As a further factor related to this matter, word has just reached us by telephone that General Eisenhower has declined to send General Gruenther to Ottawa to make a report on SHAPE progress. Possibly he does not wish to have SHAPE put in the position of bailing out the Standing Group, or it may just be that he does not want General Gruenther to appear when there is no agenda item to which he would speak.
If this matter proceeds much further it will be of very serious concern to the Department of State because it will give rise to a move for reorganization of the military structure of NATO. This, of course, has many implications. In the meantime, however, and particularly because of the Secretary’s understanding with Mr. Lovett, it would appear that the next move is up to Defense. The only action which we might take would appear to me to be a telephone call to Defense, presumably Mr. Nash, to say that we look to the Department of Defense for advice as to the reply which should be sent to Mr. Achilles (in Mr. Spofford’s absence), in response to Depto 298. I should think that the prestige, authority and position of the Standing Group is of such importance to the Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Department as a whole that they will wish to give early and serious attention to this message.