Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, Asia and the Pacific, Volume VI, Part 1

Lot 54D423

Draft of Security Treaty Article by the Consultant to the Secretary (Dulles)

VIII

The parties recognize that effective achievement of the purposes of this Treaty may be promoted if there be from time to time contacts or consultations, by or on behalf of the Council or its members, with the United Nations or its subsidiary organs or committees, or with other states, groups of states or organizations in a position to further the purposes of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the Pacific area. The Council, in its considerations pursuant to Article VII, will take the foregoing into account.¹

[Washington,] June 1, 1951.

1. The source text bears two marginal notes in an unidentified handwriting. The first reads: “tentative suggestion”. The second is as follows: “Dictated by J[ohn] F[oster] D[ulles] following talks with Spender and Berendson. But not communicated to anyone.”

   Percy Spender had resigned as Minister of External Affairs of Australia on April 26 and had been appointed Ambassador of Australia to the United States to succeed Mr. Makin. He had arrived in the United States on May 29. Ambassador Spender presented his credentials to President Truman on June 8.

   In a briefing memorandum of June 6 to George W. Perkins, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, G. Hayden Raynor, Director of the Office of British Commonwealth and Northern European Affairs, stated in part:

   “Before he left for London, Mr. Dulles talked with Mr. Spender and the New Zealand Ambassador about the text of the security agreement drawn up at Canberra during February. The principal point raised in this conversation with the two Ambassadors involved the relationship between the proposed Pacific Council and NATO and the Rio organization. Mr. Dulles explained that we did not want to incorporate language in the treaty which would require a consultative relationship between the Council and these other bodies. He pointed out that the machinery was already so complex that it would be a mistake to add another cog. Both Mr. Spender and the New Zealand Ambassador, while recognizing the validity of this line of argument nevertheless insisted that the language of the treaty should not preclude a consultative relationship. Mr. Spender suggested wording to the effect that the Council ‘may maintain a consultative relationship with States, organizations and authorities’. Mr. Dulles said that we would study the views expressed by the two Ambassadors.” (601.4311/6–651)

   Other record of conversation held between Messrs. Berendsen, Dulles, and Spender before the Consultant’s departure for London June 2 has not been found in Department of State files.