Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, European Security and the German Question, Volume III, Part 2

740.5/11–151: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom ¹

secret

Washington , November 8, 1951—7:02 p. m.

2429. For USDel Ger security.

1. In view of Ger position in discussions on security which have been going forward with Fed Govt² and in view of McCloy’s judgment as expressed in Bonn’s 317, Nov 4, rptd London 113, Paris 127,³ that recommendations on security controls contained in Report of Heads of Dels (see London’s 2127, Nov 1⁴) have no reasonable hope of acceptance by Gers and that approach agreed to in Brussels shld be discarded, we agree that question of security controls must be dealt with again by FonMins and that no action shld be taken on London proposals prior to discussion this subj by FonMins. Recommendations in Report represent best agreement obtainable short of FonMin level. Purpose of action by FonMins wld be to remove prohibitions on Ger industry to greater degree than Fr and Brit cld be induced to accept in London. We wld in no case be willing to accept prohibitions more extensive than those contained in Report.

2. Request USDel to advise other dels at appropriate time of above views.⁵ Issues in this field shld be formulated for decision by FonMins at mtg Nov 15 as suggested para 3, 2237 Nov 7 rptd Paris 971, Frankfurt 315, Bonn 43.⁶ Our view is that this shld be done in such a way as to obtain results invisaged in statement of US position contained in Draft Instrs to the Allied High Comm (T–5, Aug 29.⁷) Will elaborate further in later tel. Have no strong views re location Nov 15 mtg but inclined favor Paris.

3. For reasons already stated in Deptel 2600, Oct 25, rptd London 2181, Paris 2426,⁸ Dept does not believe that solution proposed paras d, e, and f, Bonn’s 317 re EDC formula is satis substitute for drastic reduction and simplification of prohibitions in disputed areas.

4. Defense position contained in ltr Lovett ⁹ to Acheson dted Nov 7 which reads as follows:

“I concur in the recommendation of the Heads of Dels of the Tripartite Group on Ger contained in their Report to Govts of 31 Oct 1951, in which, in accordance with the Brussels Agreement, they propose definitions of the prohibitions of Ger manufacture of atomic, biological and chemical weapons, guided missiles, aircraft, naval vessels, electronics and of scientific research with respect to all of them, and in which they propose the prohibition of manufacture of certain components in lieu of a definition of a prohibition of the manufacture of ‘heavy military equipment’.

Despite the somewhat restrictive Terms of Reference of the Tripartite Group on Ger in their London conference, I consider that the recommendations of the Heads of Dels are correctly oriented towards reducing the restrictions on Ger production included in the Brussels Agreement. I hope that you will find it desirable to arrange with the Brit and Fr Govts that the recommendations of the Tripartite Group on Ger are so transmitted to the HICOMS that they will be guided but not bound by those recommendations in their negots with the Gers. I hope further that in advising Mr. McCloy as to how the leeway given might be properly employed, you might advise him that any changes acceptable to the US must be in the direction of relaxation of the prohibitions.”

5. As noted in ltr qted above Defense considers recommendations in report wld make possible necessary production to permit Gers produce substantial part of munitions needed for own forces if they are to be adequately equipped in 1954 and is desirous maintaining agreement reached by US–UK–Fr Dels on this minimum position in event FonMins cannot agree to further removal of prohibitions.

Webb

1. This telegram was drafted by Lewis, cleared by the Defense Department, Deputy Under Secretary of State Matthews, and repeated to Paris for Byroade, who was participating in the Foreign Ministers meetings, to Bonn for McCloy, and to Frankfurt.
2. For documentation on the negotiations for a security guarantee for the Federal Republic, see pp. 1514 ff.
3. Supra.
4. Not printed.
5. On November 9 and 10 the U.S. delegation reported that it had informed the British and French delegations along these lines. (Telegrams 2283, November 9 and 2290, November 10, from London, neither printed, 740.5/11–951 and 11–1051)
6. Not printed.
7. Not printed, but for the U.S. position, see WFM T–5a, p. 1197.
8. Not printed, but see footnote 5, p. 1711.
9. Robert A. Lovett succeeded George C. Marshall as Secretary of Defense on September 17.