665.001/11–651
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Deputy Director of the Office of Western European Affairs (Williamson)1
Subject: Italian Peace Treaty
| Participants: | Mr. K. D. Jamieson, British Embassy |
| Mr. P. Francfort, French Embassy | |
| Mr. Francis T. Williamson—WE | |
| Mr. Howard J. Hilton, Jr.—WE |
The Italian Embassy, having been informed that the text of the Italian Note as set forth in the memorandum of conversation of November 5,2 with Mr. Luciolli was acceptable to the United States, France and the United Kingdom. Mr. Jamieson and Mr. Francfort came to discuss the next steps to be taken.
Mr. Jamieson said that the British Government thought that an interim reply should be sent to the Italian request. He provided a suggested text, a copy of which is attached as Annex A.3 It was agreed that the Italian views would be sought as to whether or not an interim reply along those lines would be desired or whether the [Page 738] Italian Government would prefer to wait until a substantive reply is forthcoming. Mr. Hilton was asked to inform Mr. Luciolli of the Italian Embassy that the three Governments were prepared to send an interim reply along these lines if desired by the Italian Government.
A draft of the proposed substantive reply was distributed. A copy is attached as Annex B.4 In the following discussion directed primarily at the order of the thoughts, it was agreed that a redraft would be prepared, a copy of which is attached as Annex C.4 Mr. Jamieson suggested the addition of a final paragraph which might read as follows:
“This Note and your confirmation will constitute as of the date of this exchange of Notes, a new understanding on the above-mentioned provisions of the Italian Peace Treaty between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Italy.”
Mr. Jamieson was told that the addition of this thought might raise a constitutional problem. There is no doubt about the right of the Executive to waive rights under a treaty, but the conclusion of a new agreement modifying a treaty would be a different matter. Although this would not be the case in this Note, the conclusion of such a paragraph might raise doubts in certain quarters.
In the discussion of the procedure the following points were made:
On the question of procedure, it was agreed:
1. The three Governments should agree as promptly as possible on the substantive reply to be made to the Italian Note.
2. The substance of this reply should be communicated to the Italian Government.
3. Instructions should be drafted to representatives of the three Governments accredited to friendly signatories providing for an approach to those signatories with a view to informing them of the proposed reply and requesting that their replies, if not similar in tone and argumentation, at least reach the same conclusion as set forth in the last paragraph of Annex C.
4. An effort should be made to reach general agreement on the timing of the substantive reply so that substantive replies by all friendly signatories would be made at approximately the same time.