396.1–ISG/3–851: Telegram

The United States Delegation at the Intergovernmental Study Group on Germany to the Secretary of State 1

secret   niact

Sigto 515. We are tabling today re paragraph 3 Tosig 466, March 62 for inclusion in covering report to governments following statement of US views on steel and position when agreement is reached on German, participation in Defense. If Department has comments would appreciate receiving by Friday morning March 9:

USDel has joined in recommending the approval of the attached directive as an interim measure but notes that it had been the hope of the US Government that a more far-reaching and definite set of proposals could have been worked out. In approving the report, it desires to record the following views:

US Government attaches importance to early removal of all limitations on the German steel industry but is willing to defer action on this subject in order not to complicate the conclusion of Schuman Plan treaty.

It is the view of US Government that, aside from any other circum-stances which may call for review of the agreement, once agreement has been reached on German participation in defense, far-reaching-revisions of the controls over German industry will be required. Brussels agreement provides for certain safeguards, including the prohibition of the production of certain military items. Subject to these safeguards, it provides that German production should contribute to the greatest extent possible to the support of the German contribution in manpower, and to such other phases of the common defense as may be reasonable and within its capabilities. In the view of the US, the maintenance of any prohibitions or limitations on German industry, except the prohibitions specifically provided for in the Brussels agreement any additional prohibitions or controls necessary to give them effect, would be inconsistent with the policies laid down in the Brussels agreement. In the view of the US, these additional prohibitions or controls should include only the control of atomic energy, the prohibition of the production of civil aircraft, and possibly the prohibition of certain electronic tubes. The maintenance of other prohibitions and limitations would interfere with the objective of maximizing the German production contribution to defense outside the field of prohibited items.

[Page 1377]

It is to be understood that the German productive effort will be coordinated with that of the NATO member countries and that appropriate arrangements will have to be made for this purpose.3

  1. Repeated to Frankfurt and Paris.
  2. Not printed; in this paragraph the Department of State told the U.S. Delegation that it believed it was desirable to have in the report on PLI statements by the three Governments on their attitude toward the elimination of steel limitations and the interpretation of the Brussels agreement. (396.1–ISG/3–551)
  3. In a subsequent exchange of telegrams between the U.S. ISG Delegation and the Department of State, it was agreed that the U.S. position would not be recorded in the report to the Governments but would be sent in letters to the British and French Delegations. The Department of State approved in substance the text transmitted in Sigto 515 and the final draft was delivered on March 16. For the text of the final draft, see p. 1386. Sigto 524 from London, March 9, and Tosigs 472 and 485 to London, March 8 and 13, none printed (396.1–ISG/3–951, 3–851, and 3–1151).