No. 224

740A.13/3–1251

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Perkins) to the Secretary of State 1

confidential

The Irish Minister for External Affairs, Mr. Sean MacBride, has an appointment to see you at 12:30 p.m., on Tuesday, March 13. He will be accompanied by the Irish Ambassador, Mr. John J. Hearne, and possibly also by Mr. Sean Nunan, formerly Minister to the United States and now Secretary of the Department of External Affairs. (Biographies are attached.2)

The ostensible purpose of Mr. MacBride’s trip to the United States is to address the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick in Philadelphia on St. Patrick’s Day (March 17). No doubt he will also continue the type of anti-partition agitation in which he indulged during his visit to this country in the Spring of 1949. We understand that while in Washington he hopes to see Mr. Foster of ECA and other officials. In addition to the dinners to be given for him by the Irish Ambassador and Ambassador Garrett, he will be the guest of honor at an official luncheon to be presided over by Mr. Webb at Prospect House on March 15.

We have inquired of the Irish Embassy whether Mr. MacBride wishes to raise any substantive questions when calling upon you. The Embassy professes complete ignorance of any such desire on the Minister’s part and agrees that it would be correct to assume that as the visit is an unofficial one this appointment will be in the nature of a courtesy call. It is possible, however, that Mr. MacBride may bring up one or two matters, particularly in connection with [Page 515] defense of Ireland, and a brief background paper on these questions is therefore appended.

Recommendation

There are no specific questions which I would recommend that you take up with Mr. MacBride.

[Enclosure]

United States Relations with Ireland

The following is submitted for the Secretary’s information in case the Irish Minister for External Affairs should raise any questions concerning U.S.-Irish relations during his interview:

Defense Problems

Ireland declined the invitation to join the North Atlantic Treaty, stating that this was impossible so long as partition exists. This refusal was based in part upon the alleged inability of the Irish Government to cooperate with the United Kingdom while “six of the northeastern counties are occupied by British forces” and in part upon the belief that adherence to this treaty would prejudice the Irish case by guaranteeing the territorial integrity of Northern Ireland.

The Irish requested the “assistance and mediation” of the participating States in creating a situation wherein the problem could be discussed. The U.S. replied on behalf of all the participants that the NAT was not a suitable framework within which to discuss a problem solely the concern of the United Kingdom and Ireland, and that the NAT was not intended to provide a new forum for the settlement of longstanding territorial disputes. U.S. has continued to maintain an attitude of readiness to welcome Ireland into the NATO.

Since the failure of the Irish attempt to use participation in the NAT as a bargaining point to end partition, it has been suggested that the U.S. should supply arms to Ireland or enter into bilateral defense arrangements with that country. This matter has been considered by the NSC,3 which reached the conclusion that such a special arrangement would be in conflict with the concept of the collective defense of the North Atlantic area based upon undertakings of mutual aid, and that it would invite increased pressure for similar bilateral arrangements with other countries which are not [Page 516] included in regional defense plans. The way for Ireland to get arms, therefore, would be to participate in the NAT. We are confirmed in this position by the fact that there is no guarantee that Ireland would be prepared to abandon its traditional policy of neutrality in the event of another war, even should we be willing to enter into a special defense relationship with that country.

ECA Aid

Following the allocation of two million dollars to Ireland on February 16, we informed the Irish Government of our desire to enter negotiations looking toward the suspension of direct ECA assistance. We also notified the British Government of this intention, since Ireland normally obtains its dollars through the sterling area pool. There has been little reaction from Dublin thus far, other than word that the Irish will begin at once to discuss arrangements with the British for converting sterling holdings to meet dollar needs. Mr. MacBride expects to see Mr. Foster while in Washington and will presumably discuss this matter with him at that time.

Partition

We have consistently held the view that the partition question is one of primary concern to the British and Irish Governments in which this Government should not interfere.

  1. Drafted by Ranney of BNA, cleared in draft by Perkins and Bonbright.
  2. None printed.
  3. For text of NSC 83/1, “The Position of the United States Regarding Irish Membership in NATO and Military Assistance to Ireland Under a Bilateral Arrangement,” October 17, 1950, see Foreign Relations, 1950, vol. iii, p. 1477.