CFM files, lot M–88, box 253, miscellaneous memoranda
Memorandum by the Deputy Director of the Office of European Regional Affairs (Parsons) to the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Perkins)1
Subject: Reorganization of Standing Group
Reference: Mr. Knight’s memorandum of September 25 “Possible British Support for a Reorganization of the Standing Group”.2
In view of the obvious disadvantage to us of allowing the British to pose as the sole champions of a reorganization of the Standing Group, this memorandum attempts to suggest a basis for talks with the Pentagon (probably Admiral Wright and Frank Nash) to obtain a U.S. position on the Standing Group reorganization.
So far as I know, the two reorganization proposals mentioned in Mr. Knight’s memorandum, namely (a) the Belgian proposal for a fourth, rotating member, and (b) the Canadian proposal, are the only two existing proposals for Standing Group reorganization. As the Belgian proposal is quite evidently unacceptable, I should think that our first step should be to determine whether the Canadian proposal is acceptable. The Canadians propose that when the Military Committee is not in session the Military Representatives Committee would [Page 291] act as the Military Committee and, furthermore, that political guidance to the SG from the Deputies would he channeled through the MRC. Presumably we should check the Canadians’ proposal with them before taking it to the Pentagon.
In asking Admiral Wright and Nash to determine the military acceptability of this rather minor reorganization, we should indicate our support therefor along the lines set forth by Air Marshal Elliot in his talk with Mr. Knight.
If the proposal is militarily acceptable, we might suggest that the second step would be for the American member of the Standing Group to place this question on the Standing Group agenda for early consideration. SG approval would then be passed to the Military Representatives Committee and later to the Military Committee for action at its meeting before the Rome Council meeting.
If the Military Committee also approved, the final step would be to have the Canadians introduce the proposal in the Deputies just before Rome or in the Council meeting itself there.
The purpose of handling the matter in this way with U.S. initiative in the Standing Group would be twofold: (a) to place the proposed reorganization on a Big Three basis without allowing any one of the three to pose as the protector of the non-Standing Group nations, and (b) to enable the Standing Group to take an action which presumably would be popular with those nations and enable it to retrieve some of the ground lost by its initial refusal to attend the Ottawa conference.