740.5/10–1251: Telegram

The United States Delegation at the Tripartite Talks on German Security Controls to the Secretary of State 1

secret

1810. From USDel Ger security. First meeting tripartite comite Ger security met October 10 with fol representation.

UK Roberts; US Trimble, acting for Holmes, and Reinstein; France LeRoy. Appointed Steering Comite to report in week or 10 days with fol representation: UK Lt. Gen. Crawford; US Maj. Gen. Magruder; France Sauvagnargues who is being replaced by Gen. De Ganeval. It was agreed every effort would be made avoid publicity concerning work of comite.2

Discussion in plenary consisted only of brief exchange views, in which all delegations agreed on need for speed. Fr advanced idea of creation, in addition to prohibited list, of “zone of surveillance”. They explained difficulty of establishing borderline of prohibitions requires surveillance outside prohibited areas. US made reservation as to propriety of concept under Mins terms of reference.

Discussions continued October 10 and 11 Steering Comite. Fr tabled proposal which provides in important categories much broader definition prohibited articles than those provided by US (reDeptel 1844 to London October 5, sent Paris 2012, rptd info Frankfort 22193) and is also very restrictive in field of scientific research. Text Fr prohibited list fols next succeeding tel.4

Zone of surveillance covered entire armament industry and certain other products such as industrial explosives.

In discussion Fr explained their purpose in drawing up list heavy military equipment was prevent creation industry capable production heavy military equipment. Fr laid great emphasis in presentation on statement in Brussels agreement that Gers shld not possess their own sources of essential war material. This necessitated broad definition prohibited articles. For example, a capacity for making 105 mm. guns cld readily be converted to make 155 mm. guns. To effectively prohibit 155’s it is necessary to prohibit 105’s. US rep stated strong disagreement with this concept. When US suggested Fr restrictions were [Page 1707] so broad as to limit effectively Ger contribution to western defense in production area, Fr suggested Gers cld concentrate on permitted categories, which they cld produce for NATO countries. They suggested for example that Ger might produce rifles and machine guns on large scale.

In re zone of surveillance, Fr stated character and method carrying out of surveillance was outside terms of reference. They indicated their thinking was that surveillance would be effected by Ger control. They did not state whether this would also, under contractual arrangements, involve Allied inspection.

Brit have not tabled paper and will present their proposals in subcomites on individual categories. They indicated their position on heavy military equipment was between US and Fr.

Subcomites have been established on heavy military equipment, chemical and biological weapons, naval vessels and aircraft. Instructions are to prepare comparison positions of delegations and to report to Steering Comite within several days. US representative on heavy military equipment is Gen Magruder, Fr rep Gen. De Ganeval.5

  1. Repeated to Paris for Harriman and to Frankfurt.
  2. The most extensive collection of materials on the financial and security talks at London is in the CFM files, lot M–88, boxes 205 and 206. It includes minutes of the various committees, summaries of decisions, documents presented by the three delegations, background papers, memoranda, and telegrams to and from the United States delegations.
  3. Supra.
  4. The French list, transmitted in telegram 1809 from London, October 12 (740.5/10–1251), consisted of heavy military equipment, aircraft, warships, chemical equipment intended for military purposes, products for chemical warfare, products for biological warfare, and activities in the field of atomic energy. It was circulated at the talks as TGG(SC)P 4.
  5. On October 13 the U.S. delegation reported that the British had tabled in the Heavy Military Equipment Subcommittee a proposal more restrictive than the French. Telegram 1813 from London, October 13 (740.5/10–1351).