No. 224
740A.13/3–1251
Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for
European Affairs (Perkins) to the Secretary of
State
1
confidential
[Washington,] March 12,
1951.
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.
