740.5/11–1951: Telegram
The Ambassador in the Netherlands (Chapin) to the Acting Secretary of State 1
503. During evening Nov 17 Spierenberg, chairman OEEC, discussed with Emb officer certain aspects EDF. Stated privately that within few days Dutch will present alternate “plan for common budget” which they have just completed. Declined reveal any details. Besides himself, said draftsmen were Kohnstamm, Van der Beugel, and Blaisse, that they now “have FonOff SecGen Boon in full support EDF”, and that FonOff gradually swinging over to same view. Stikker still hesitant, however. Spierenberg claimed FonOff tried some time ago drag him into EDF negots (presumably this refers to Paris discussions) but that he “refused categorically” arguing subject matter was FonOff responsibility. Also claimed have “argued with his friends in Fr Fin Ministry” to amend their views re EDF financing so as make EDF more acceptable to Neth Cabinet.
Spierenberg wld not state specifically that Cabinet had approved his “plan” but indicated he had no doubt re its approval. Said “plan” had not been completed at time Stikker talked with Secretary in Paris (Paris tel 58, November 162), therefore no mention made of it.
Spierenberg described his conversation Nov 17 with PriMin Drees wherein Spierenberg argued strongly and apparently convinced Drees that his “common budget proposal” must be submitted now order demonstrate that Neth Govt not endeavoring hamper EDF talks and order disassociate Neth from what he described as “Van Zeeland attitude”. Said Van Zeeland more opposed to EDF than ever before for which Spierenberg bitterly critical. Said Van Zeeland simply “playing politics” because latter certain Belgian constitution wld have to be amended in order adopt draft EDF legislation, that Belgian Govt cld not obtain two-thirds votes thereby resulting in fall Van Zeeland Govt.
He repeated what is common knowledge here, namely that Neth states generally more sympathetic to EDF than is Cabinet, but latter “coming around”. Acknowledged that most deps not well informed on subject but added that govt now explaining its provisions and significance to (second chamber) comite members. When asked if he believed draft EDF legislation wld require constitutional revision, said he did not believe so, but not sure. Apparently this an open question until EDF talks progress further. Regardless, he believed Neth [Page 929] Govt could muster two-thirds vote for EDF legislation including his “common budget proposal,” whatever latter is.
In reading above shld be kept in mind that Spierenberg ardent Schuman Plan and EDF supporter, and possibility exists he may be overly optimistic in his description Neth Cabinet attitude.
He concluded by stating he convinced Stikker will not be in Cabinet after 1952 elections and FonMin will begin shopping around for “good international job”.