740.5/4–1151: Telegram
The United States Deputy Representative on the North Atlantic Council (Spofford) to the Secretary of State 1
Depto 750. Ref Depto 723 and Todep 352.2 Pls bring this msg to attention Knight and Admiral Wright. Have discussed with Starkenborgh how best to solve question of agreed minute and interpretation of para 16 of DC 24/3 (final).3 He and we agree most satisfactory and simplest method wld be agreed minute given Todep 352 amplified (1) to take account of incorporation of Def Comite in Council, and (2) to cover points made by Admiral Wright on meaning of terms “militarily unacceptable” and “report”. Starkenborgh now agrees to undesirability of specifying guidance shld be “binding” during possible dispute or of attempting to spell out what wld happen shld politically irresistible force meet militarily immovable situation. We have each agreed to recommend to our govts acceptance of fol language: “For purposes of para 11 of D–D (51) 86, term “guidance” is interpreted to be synonymous with term ‘direction’. Thus, gen guidance by CD described in para 11(a) has same meaning as gen direction, and political guidance described in para 11(c) has same meaning as political direction. Term ‘guidance’ is preferred as being more usual and appropriate in describing relationship between two bodies of such standing as CD and SG. Latter will not be free to reject or to alter political guidance recd from CD. In event it finds such advice militarily unacceptable, it will follow procedure set forth in para 16 DC 24/3 (final).”4
With respect to that para, it is observed that (1) words “militarily unacceptable” are interpreted as meaning “militarily impracticable of accomplishment”; (2) new terms of ref of CD preclude possibility of conflicts with strategic conceptions previously approved by higher NATO agencies; (3) word “report” is interpreted literally and not as conferring any new auth upon mil agencies of NATO since we [Page 131] hope to get agreement or text including agreed minute April 16 and since suggested language must be agreed by other ten dels if accepted by US and Dutch, wld appreciate instrs soonest.5
Telegraphing separately about port proposal.
- Repeated to Paris.↩
- April 6, pp. 125 and 127.↩
- Not printed.↩
- This recommended wording of the proposed minute was accepted by the Department of State in telegram Todep 361 to London, April 13 (740.5/4–1151).↩
- Telegram Todep 363 to London, April 14, not printed, gave permission to include as part of the agreed minute the wording of this paragraph beginning with “With respect to …” and ending with “mil agencies of NATO” (740.5/4–1151).↩