Lot 54D423
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Chief of the Government Branch, Office for Occupied Areas, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Babcock)1
Subject: Proposed Pacific Security Treaty
| Participants: | Ambassador of Australia, Honorable P. C. Spender |
| Mr. David McNicol, Embassy of Australia3 | |
| Ambassador of New Zealand, Sir Carl Berendsen | |
| Mr. G. R. Laking, Embassy of New Zealand | |
| Ambassador John Foster Dulles | |
| Colonel C. Stanton Babcock | |
| Mr. Livingston Satterthwaite |
Sir Carl Berendsen said that he had received word from his Government concerning the changes proposed by Mr. Dulles in Articles VII and VIII of the draft Pacific Security Treaty prepared in Canberra in February 1951. He said that the wording proposed for Article [Page 218] VII4 was satisfactory on the understanding that the Council established by Arcticle VII could establish committees and subcommittees if it so desired.
In regard to Article VIII, Sir Carl said that his Government suggested the following wording:
“The Council, established by Article VII, may maintain a consultative relationship with States, Regional Organizations, Associations of States, or other authorities in the position to further the purposes of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the Pacific Area.”
Mr. Spender said that the views of his Government were similar to those expressed by the New Zealand Ambassador.
Mr. Dulles said that he would want to consider these proposals before expressing any definitive views but that he felt it was unwise to eliminate the first phrase of Article VIII which was designed to emphasize that this treaty was a first step toward a more comprehensive security arrangement. He added that this particular phrase had been inserted to meet the views expressed by the Far Eastern Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Both Mr. Spender and Sir Carl said that they felt sure that there would be no objection to the retention of this phrase.
Mr. Dulles then said that he felt that Sir Carl’s draft of Article VIII might better read: “The Council, established by Article VII, is authorized to maintain … etc.” rather than “may maintain … etc.” since the Council, under this treaty had no power itself to establish a “consultative relationship” with anyone. There could, not be any such relationship unless all parties concerned wanted it. Mr. Dulles pointed out that the United States was not prepared to commit itself, for example, as a member of NATO or of the Rio Pact, to consultation by these associations with the Pacific Council.
Both Ambassadors seemed quite satisfied with the suggestions made by Mr. Dulles and with the interpretation he gave to the wording of Article VIII.
Mr. Dulles said that he felt it very desirable to announce at an early date (within a week or two), the agreed text of this treaty since the growing anxiety regarding Iran5 made it essential that we take promptly every possible step to make clear to the world the essential unity of the Free Nations. Mr. Spender agreed and suggested that such a text should be initialed when it is made public.
- The source text is accompanied by the following typed, unsigned covering note: “Let’s circulate Col. Babcock’s version of the M/C if any distribution is wanted, and file Mr. Dulles’ as follows: [here follow filing instructions]”. The Dulles version is printed infra. Another notation indicates that Babcock’s version was distributed to Livingston T. Merchant, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, and U. Alexis Johnson, Director of the Office of Northeast Asian Affairs.↩
- The memorandum was drafted the following day.↩
- Second Secretary of Embassy.↩
- The language agreed upon at this meeting for Articles VII and VIII is included in the document, infra.↩
- Documentation regarding relations of the United States and Iran is scheduled for publication in volume v.↩