740.00/11–2751: Telegram
The Consul at Strasbourg ( Andrews) to the Acting Secretary of State 1
67. RefContels 64 and 66 26th.2 Second part session Consultative Assembly opened afternoon 26th in atmosphere seriousness and apparent determination on part of dels to make worthwhile, practical and speedy contributions toward Eur Union. It seems that new life has been given Assembly by last week’s conference and that frank US congressional criticisms of CE excuses and procrastination in unifying Eur have served far more as tonic than as discouragement to Assembly. This particularly true of Fr, Belgs, Itals, Gers; furthermore all Brit conservatives with whom we have talked have said conf with USDel should prove most beneficial to CE, one remarking “Amer frankness was just what CE needed.”
Provisional plan of agenda order outlined by Spaak differs from that stated at press conf 26th (Contel 66), According Spaak report gen affs comite on aims and prospects Eur policy (AS)3(75)3 and Layton’s oral report on conf with US Congressional del would be discussed 27th and 28th only, fol which there would be debated further report on creation specialized auths (AS)3(13),4 report from special comite on agric (AS)3(4),5 report on coordination Eur postal relations and telecommunications (AS)3(54)6 which would occupy Assembly until end present week. He expressed hope that several FonMins would be available to reply to debate on aims and prospects Eur policy when resumed as rapporteur GA comite Struye introduced his report which begins by stating that despite important debates and speeches of great interest Assembly has on whole in past three years confined its activity to voting on too many res and recommendations on which for most part no subsequent action has been taken. Then report contains these proposals: (1) fundamental revision of CE statute, which is subj of separate report; (2) unification or at least coordination activities Brussels treaty organization, OEEC and Consultative Assembly which soon might be faced with [Page 74] new “assemblies” for Schuman auth and Eur Army; (3) request by Assembly that govts member states convene early in 1952 Eur conf of reps of govts, parliaments, CE, other Eur institutions and leading econ, trade union, employers and legal organizations for purpose studying changes and reorganization necessary in sphere Eur cooperation; and (4) creation of “college” of European Affairs Ministers which would meet regularly and often, would result in compulsory mutual consultation of govts concerned on all Eur problems at all stages their development and might be headed by joint high comm to represent Eur in international negots or in management some international institutions. Report emphasizes that existing differences opinion re methods creating polit union must not be allowed divert Assembly from immed task of seeking unite all member states in econ, fin and social fields; that joint def requires Amer aid and that cooperation between Eur and Amer is axiomatic (no member of GA comite having advocated “neutral” Eur third force); that comite was unable resolve differences between those advocating purely continental polit community composed France, Ital, FedRep and Benelux and those opposed creation West Eur Union without UK and Scandinavia; and that new and urgent appeals should be addressed to UK to join Eur army. Struye’s speech was eloquent and closely followed by dels. He conjured up distress which would be felt by all who fought for freedom in two wars if our sons were in a Eur army which included former enemies but not former comrades in arms, the Brit.
In well prepared concise yet comprehensive speech friendly toward US Layton gave resume of conf between US and CE dels in which he underlined fol gen aspects Amer speeches: insistence on need for Eur unity and on wide extent prevalence this opinion in US; belief that present rate progress toward unification too slow; exhortation that Eur overcome tendency emphasize difficulties rather than advantages polit and econ integration of Eur; need for West Eur to bear in mind that one of features Amer policy as set forth in MSA of 1951 was to encourage econ unification and polit federation of Eur; keen interest of Amer public in prompt progress on Schuman plan and Eur Army; avoidance suggest precise steps to be taken for Eur unity in view position UK and Scandinavia; and failure Eurs to do utmost in econ field and to understand burden shouldered by US on behalf free world. Speaker stressed significance US dels suggestion that in future strings might be attached to Amer assistance if efforts unify Eur continued be unsuccessful, quoting Judd’s words that “contribution US to common cause would be given more willingly, more promptly and perhaps in larger measure if all peoples Eur were to show growing sense unity and determination to carry it out”. In closing Layton said that it [Page 75] would be great mistake continue controversy in present session on detailed points, that “we should not be behaving very charitably if we pursued our friends with a series of sniping shots on their way home across the Atlantic” and that “the fresh breeze from the West which blew through this hall last week should stimulate us to fresh efforts and so justify the confidence of Pres Truman who expressed the opinion to me last June that a conf between the Parliaments of Eur and Amer could do nothing but good”.
Afternoon session debate continued on GA comite report. Fr dels Mollet and Teitgen spoke earnestly and eloquently of possible avenues of development for CE. They appealed for closer Brit participation than they saw in tripartite Wash declaration Sept 14. Mollet approved calling Eur study conf above mentioned early 1952 on lines 1948 conf which led to formation CE. Its object would be to regroup and coordinate existing Eur organizations. Teitgen described dilemma of either a partial Eur without Brit and Scandinavia or present organization without power or sovereignty, which was merely vehicle to express public opinion. Problem of this session was to find the solution, possibly in College of Mins for Eur Affairs with some sovereign powers delegated to each Minister.
Minor speeches made by Neths del Van Der Goes, RPF Gen Koenig and Irish del Stanford/Latter made immature speech criticising Amer cultural weakness. Large part Assembly dels walked out on him. Other speakers referred to US interest in action now as incentive to decision.
Brit speakers scheduled for tomorrow’s meeting including chairman Maxwell-Fyfe expected reply to Fr and Belgian pressure for clear indication Brit position.
- Repeated to Bonn, London, Paris, Ankara, Athens, Brussels, Copenhagen, Dublin, The Hague, Luxembourg, Oslo, Reykjavik, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna, Ottawa, and Wellington.↩
- Neither printed.↩
- Enclosure to despatch 154 from Strasbourg, November 27. (740.00/11–2751)↩
- Enclosure to despatch 161 from Strasbourg, December 1. (740.00/12–151)↩
- Enclosure to despatch 160 from Strasbourg, November 30. (740.00/11–3051)↩
- Enclosure to despatch 165 from Strasbourg, December 5. (740.00/12–551)↩