896.1–PA/6–551: Telegram
The United States Representative at the Four-Power Exploratory Talks (Jessup) to the Secretary of State 1
niact
7508. From Jessup. At his request I saw Parodi last evening. He had talked with Queuille who feels strongly that Western Powers shld take no definite action to interrupt mtgs of deputies prior to Fr elections June 17. Parodi was sure that regardless of results of elections, it wld be possible immed thereafter to terminate deputies mtg.
Queuillc’s idea is that another identic note shld be sent by Three Govts answering Sov’s reply. This note wld contain a full statement of reasons why we are unwilling to include NAT and base sites even as unagreed item. Fr were already working on text of such a note and Parodi hopes to let me see it this afternoon after it has been shown to Schuman. As a matter of timing, Parodi said that it wld probably be necessary to postpone next mtg until Thurs instead of tomorrow and that wld leave only ten days. He contemplated possibility of notes being sent on Thurs with a recess until Monday to await Sov reply. He was not quite clear what deputies wld talk about next week. I think he personally agrees that a series of inconclusive sessions in which Sovs wld have splendid opportunity for propaganda wld not be helpful for Fr electoral sitn. However, in defending Queuille’s view he took line that Gromyko’s propaganda was printed only in Humanité, readers of which already have their minds made up and that other papers wld give Gromyko’s statements small circulation. He emphasized that Queuille was pleased with way election campaign was going and anticipates that Communists will lose large number of seats. He stressed point that Queuille’s political judgment is very good and said that he personally was also convinced that it wld be undersirable to break off deputies sessions in next twelve days.
When I asked Parodi whether he was also going to inform UK del about his talk with Queuille he said “perhaps” and again revealed his lack of sympathy with operations of UK del. He seemed to think that UK position was relatively unimportant and was obviously hoping for US understanding and support. I did not undertake to argue with him about appraisal of Fr opinion and effect on elections of any break. I did stress that we also had political problems in US and I pointed out that we must keep in mind longer range view in terms of whole internatl sitn and Western position vis-à-vis Sov Union.2