740.5/11–2951: Telegram
The United States Delegation at the Eighth Session of the North Atlantic Council to the Acting Secretary of State 1
Secto 105. Pearson opened fifth meeting NAC 2 with announcement deputies had not completed work considering draft resolutions on EDC submitted by US and by Benelux countries on previous day. Deputies would present draft before meeting concluded.
Pearson presented report of Defense Ministers.
I. MT force requirements covered in previous discussion.
II. “Military Progress of NATO” (MC 5/3 final)3 received by council for info.
[Page 738]III. “Proposals for reorganization of NATO Military Structure (MC 22–11 final) received for info.
IV. “Progress on Command Arrangements for Mediterranean and Middle East” (MC 38 final) noted, and agreed request SG press further development and make definitive report through mil comm next council meeting.
V. “Terms Reference for Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic” (MC 22–10 final) approved. Canadian Defense Minister Claxton suggested clarification record indicate terms were approved subject reservation UK, and when UK concurrence forthcoming implementation commands structure possible without further ref to council. Eden said understood Claxton point but preferred text be allowed stand.
VI. “Proposals for NATO Command in Channel and Southern North Sea Area” (MC 34)4 approved.
VII. “Division of Responsibilities in Wartime between National Territorial Commanders and Supreme Commanders and Subordinate Allied Commanders (annex C to MC 36 final)5 approved. This directs CD review MC 36 re political and constitutional points involved and return SG with any recommended modifications. Report by CD and mil com requested for next council meeting.
VIII. Annex D to MC 35 and MC 35–16 on standardization small arms and SA ammunition approved. Resolution stresses importance making progress in standardization and directs SG give high priority studies this matter.
IX. Infrastructure deferred for discussion later in meeting.
X. Recommendation re “national legislation on rights and immunities of NATO forces” accepted and deputies asked report on progress national legislation in process or being considered by each member country.7
XI. Council noted Defense Ministers recommendation re “information concerning NATO forces” to effect full support should be given efforts provide adequate public information on activities NATO forces to extent consistent with security.8
[Page 739]Council considered draft resolution covering Norwegian and Danish queries to be referred CD mentioned Secto 93.9 Acheson objected to para calling for CD study economic capabilities NATO countries as compared Soviet bloc. Pointed out would duplicate TCC, and deputies could not handle huge project this nature. Danish Finance Minister Kristensen said had no objection in light TCC report to postponing study econ capabilities. Council accepted referral to CD of request for documents to be used inform public and official groups at home and after some discussion accepted para requesting CD conclude study aims Soviet foreign policy. Acheson suggested most effective means synthesizing views latter point would be private discussion this topic by Foreign Ministers next meeting.
Spofford presented report re infrastructure consisting of comments by deputies on MC 32 and MC 32–110 said there are still delays in implementation. MC 32–1 contained recommendations from SHAPE to avoid delays. These recommendations to be considered further by deputies, SG and SHAPE. Deputies now have agreed organizational and financial procedures for implementation. However, problem beginning rather than ending. Program estimated seven billion dollars through 1954. New items to be subjected to infrastructure formula including training facilities, radar installations and fortifications. TCC studying implications within its general terms of reference. Treaty agencies will have to work out recommendations made by TCC. With large program forthcoming arrangements must be made more effective. Re burden sharing, complex multilateral negots are slow and difficult. Maximum delegation of authority to reps necessary but no sign this will be forthcoming. CD recommended as soon as member govts have studied ref documents and TCC report, deputies in connection with SG and [Page 740] SHAPE prepare report for council and stimulate action by member govts where necessary. Report approved.
Pearson next raised question statement by NATO on flood relief in Po Valley. It was agreed to refer this deputies for agreement on text to be presented at afternoon meeting.
Council next received EDC draft mentioned para one. After discussion led by Claxton re status Allied forces other than those in occupation in Germany and assurance it was intended all forces be on equal footing, resolution adopted by council.11 (Text cabled separately).12
Report by “comite on North Atlantic community”13 presented by Pearson. Said report of interim nature because related to continuing activity. Requested approval and mandate to continue comm work. Report covered:
- a.
- Coordination and consultation on foreign policy re steps designed promote peace. Basic principle to obtain action in common interest and prevent that against common interest. Qualifying factors such as activity in relation to UN limited community’s ability. Need for consultation at early stages emphasized. Increasing role which deputies could play if given additional authority mentioned.
- b.
- Possible relation between Parliamentary reps and NATO. Different positions in different countries made impossible this juncture specific recommendation.
- c.
- Closer econ, social and cultural cooperation designed promote conditions of econ stability and well-being. Work FEB, OEEC, and conference on migration important this field. Desirable comm not cut across their work.
- d.
- Collaboration in fields cultural and public info. Great need in world for info re NATO. However, believed individual countries should carry main burden and NATO should build conservatively on small organization it now has. Statement principles now under study.
Dr. Cunha said important not overload deputies and doubted NATO should become involved problems such as movement labor. Felt desirable [Page 741] not increase number organizations related to NATO. Lange thought study might pay more attention internal structure NATO itself. Was time to reform our ways; too large assembly present now to discuss vital issues. Did not put forth specific suggestion. Thought deputies should delegate work to subcomites. Constant problem for Foreign Minister was to carry govt and Parliament along his lines thinking. Parliaments need same kind of education council members receive. Italian Finance Minister Pella stressed attention report paid to labor problem and related problems of manpower and unemployment. Said Italy needed external means to meet problem and that emigration must occur. Requested concrete action by comm. Pearson replied although regarded Pella’s proposals as very serious he believed comm should continue study and report at next council meeting rather than attempt bring up concrete proposal while problem under consideration at Brussels. Re Lange’s suggestion for organization NATO work comm would pursue this on priority basis. Eden said must be careful not multiply work without multiplying result. Felt other bodies could handle many problems social field. Was all right give deputies tasks in econ field but they should not be asked carry these out until TCC report available. Report adopted by council.
Pearson mentioned invitation of Portugues Govt to hold next council meeting Lisbon. Was decided hold this subject over until afternoon meeting along with consideration communiqué and statement re flood relief Po Valley.
- Repeated to London, Paris, Brussels, The Hague, Copenhagen, Oslo, Reykjavik, Lisbon, Ottawa, Athens, Ankara, and Luxembourg.↩
- The fifth meeting, held on Wednesday, November 28, began at 10:00 a. m.↩
- Military Committee documents referred to in this document are not found in the files of the Department of State.↩
-
The resolution approved by the Council, based on MC–34 Final, was circulated as Annex B to Council Document C8–D/9 and read as follows:
“The North Atlantic Council:
Having noted the Military Committee’s proposals for the Establishment of a NATO Command in the Channel and Southern North Sea Area (MC. 34(Final)),
Having noted the proposed terms of reference for the Allied Commander-in-Chief Channel and Southern North Sea (MC. 34/1),
Having further noted the nomination by the United Kingdom Government of Admiral Sir Arthur John Power as Allied Commander-in-Chief, Channel and Southern North Sea.
Resolves:
That the recommendations of the Military Committee be accepted and
That the appointment of Admiral Sir Arthur John Power as Allied Commander-in-Chief Channel and Southern North Sea be confirmed.”
↩ - The resolution approved by the Council, based on MC–36 Final, was circulated as Annex C to Council Document C8–D/9.↩
- The resolution approved by the Council, based on MC–35 Final and MC–35/1 Final, was circulated as Council Document C8–D/9, Annex D.↩
- This recommendation was based on paragraph X of the “Report of the Defense Ministers to the North Atlantic Council,” Council Document C8–D/9.↩
- This recommendation was based on paragraph XI, ibid. ↩
-
Supra. The draft resolution that was under consideration by the Council was circulated as Council Document C8–D/13 and read as follows:
“The North Atlantic Council:
With respect to the reports and statements presented to the Eighth Session under Items V to VIII of its agenda,
Requests the Council Deputies:
- (a)
- in consultation with the NATO military agencies, to prepare two documents based on these reports and statements, one which may be used for public distribution, and the other for Ministers to use only in confidential discussions with their parliamentary committees;
- (b)
- in the light of the TCC report, to prepare a comprehensive study of the economic capabilities of the NATO countries as compared with those of the Soviet Bloc;
- (c)
- to complete their study of Soviet foreign policy, its aims and means.”
- Spofford’s report to the Council on the “Physical Progress of Infrastructure” was circulated as Council Document C8–D/10 and contained the Council Deputies’ comments on MC–32 and MC–32/1. The Deputies’ recommendation was that as soon as the member governments have been able to study these two military committee documents, and, in light of the TCC and of SHAPE’s infrastructure plans, the study should be considered further by the Council Deputies with a view to preparing a report for submission to the Council at an early date.↩
-
The draft resolution, which appeared in earlier drafts as Council Documents C8–D/11 and C8–D/12, was rewritten by the Council Deputies and presented to the Council as C8–D/14. It read as follows:
“The North Atlantic Council:
Having received statements with respect to the status of negotiations for the establishment of a European Defense Community, and the status of negotiations with the German Federal Republic concerning the contractual arrangements to replace the occupation statute,
Hopes that the Paris Conference will conclude its activities at the earliest possible moment so that definitive report can be made to the Council for consideration at its next meeting, and
Requests the appropriate treaty agencies in the meantime to give early attention to the problem of correlating the obligations and organizational relationships of the European Defense Community with those of the North Atlantic Treaty so that discussions with the Paris Conference on this question may be held and concluded as soon as possible.”
↩ - The text of the resolution was transmitted to the Department of State in telegram Secto 98 from Rome, November 28, not printed (740.5/11–2851).↩
- The 21-page “Interim Report by the Committee on the North Atlantic Community” was circulated as Council Document C8–D/6.↩