Editorial Note
Vice Consul H. Stewart Beers responded to the circular airgram of August 3 in despatch 49 from Strasbourg, August 9. He said that the attitude of Edouard Bonnefous “is considered here to be nothing more than the result of personal animosity.” Beers reported that officials of the Secretariat at Strasbourg claimed that the Bonnefous Proposal for a European Transport Authority “was ghost written, and that Bonnefous was primarily interested in furthering his personal ambitions when he urged its adoption”. (740.00/8–951) In despatch 850 from London, August 14, Attaché Margaret Joy Tibbetts reported that British attitudes toward the Council of Europe had not changed appreciably in the past year and that the majority of British delegates of both parties “remain skeptical of the Assembly’s ability to exercise responsibility” and they remained cautious toward deeper British involvement. Individual delegates such as R. W. G. MacKay, continued to be enthusiastic in their support of the Assembly principle, “but the majority of British delegates are pessimistic about the Assembly’s prospects.” Tibbetts concluded that “an influential Labour Party contact” had [Page 43] stated that British interest in and support of the Council of Europe might well be strengthened if the relationship between the Council and the United States could be developed. (740.00/8–1451) In telegram 115 from Bonn, August 16, McCloy reported that the general attitude of the German delegation toward the forthcoming autumn session of the Consultative Assembly was one of hope with strong intent to achieve progress and that defeatism was not prevalent, nor was the expectation of absenteeism. (740.00/8–1651) Counselor of Embassy Outerbridge Horsey reported from Rome on September 6 in despatch 557 that many Italian delegates to the Consultative Assembly “have voiced increasing disappointment that the Assembly has failed to make any real progress towards European federation. It is generally felt this has been due to British obstructionist tactics and to Scandinavian aloofness, as a result of British influence.” However the Italians had not given up hope in the Assembly’s future and the Italian Government and especially Count Sforza were continuing to support and sponsor the institution. (740.00/9–651) On October 11, Bruce informed the Department in despatch 1012 from Paris that other French delegates to the Assembly “share to some degree the discouragement over accomplishments of the Council, and particularly of the Assembly, expressed by Edouard Bonnefous. The Embassy has not, however, encountered anything like the same vehemence of expression in talking with other French representatives, who certainly have no intention of giving up the Council of Europe as a lost cause or of boycotting the coming session of its Assembly.” Bruce added that French delegates had been particularly frustrated by the limitations imposed on the Assembly by the Statute of the Council and by “the refusal of the British Government not merely to participate in a federation but even to participate in any ‘functional’ institution possessing a supranational authority.” (740.00/10–1151) Despatches from The Hague of August 14, Athens of August 18, Reykjavik of August 16, and Copenhagen of August 23 in response to the Department’s circular airgram of August 3 are in file 740.00.