Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Western European Security, Volume V, Part 1

Conference files, lot 59 D 95, CF 104

Report of the Special Committee of Ministers on Infrastructure to the North Atlantic Council ¹

secret
C9–D/21

Lisbon, February 25, 1952.

The Special Committee of Ministers representing the ten countries directly concerned with the Third Slice Infrastructure Programme have had a series of meetings to consider the reports referred to them by the Council at the meeting on 20th February, 1952.²

I. Report by the Council Deputies on Physical Progress of Infrastructure (C9–D/3)³

1. The Committee noted this report and recommended that the Council note with approval the recommendations in paragraphs 3 (c) and (f) of C9–D/3.

II. Report by the Council Deputies on problems connected with the financing of the Third Slice Infrastructure Programme (C9–D/11 (Revise))⁴

2. The main task of the Committee was to endeavour to agree on a method of sharing the total cost of the Airfields, Signals Communications and Headquarters Programme, as submitted by SHAPE in SHAPE/LOG/1–166/5, SHAPE/LOG/1–39/5, SHAPE/LOG/87–52, amended by recommendations of SACEUR in MCM 13–52 and approved by the Military Committee (MCM 14–52) as the Third Slice of Infrastructure estimated to cost 162,500,000 pounds sterling as set out in Appendix A of C9–D/11 (Revise).⁵

3. Upon examination it was found that this programme included the provision of three deployment airfields to be used by Germany and located outside Germany. The Committee felt that work on these airfields should not form part of the Third Slice but should be postponed for later consideration.

4. The member nations agreed to contribute to the remaining total estimated cost of the Third Slice as follows:

	(Millions of Pounds)
Belgium and Luxembourg	10.0
Canada	8.1
Denmark	6.1
France	20.0
Italy	12.0
Netherlands	6.2
Norway	4.6
United Kingdom*	20.0
United States	65.0
Total	£152.0

5. The procedure with respect to payments under the Ottawa Agreement of 5th October, 1951 (AC/4–D/27)⁶ will apply to payments for the Third Slice of Infrastructure and also, as far as practicable, to the allocation of the contribution in kind made by the United Kingdom.

6. Every effort will be made to ensure that the programme is carried out for the sum provided, but in the event of the costs exceeding such a sum the additional cost will be borne pro rata to the sums mentioned in paragraph 4 above.

7. The cost of land and local utilities required to carry out this programme is not included in the sum to be shared under this agreement. Such land and local utilities will be provided by the countries in which the land is located.

8. The arrangements set out above will not constitute a precedent for any future Infrastructure programme.

9. The provisions relating to the civilian economic benefits of the signals element of the programme and to the ultimate disposal of infrastructure facilities which were set forth in paragraphs 5(a) and 8 respectively of the Ottawa agreement will be applied to the Third Slice Infrastructure programme. The provisions of paragraph 7 of the Ottawa agreement relating to standards and rates of construction and other technical details will also apply.

10. All host countries will start immediately the procedures necessary for the acquisition of land required for airfields.

III. Recommendations for the Future

11. The revised terms of reference of SACEUR give him responsibility for “making recommendations, as necessary, to the Standing Group and to nations on Infrastructure.…”, and it is the Committee’s recommendation that a firm, time-phased programme of common infrastructure should be prepared and made available well in advance of the annual reviews, and should be presented in detail as to purpose, priority, cost, etc. Infrastructure programmes for the years 1953 and 1954 should be agreed upon and an arrangement for the sharing of the cost included as part of the total defence effort in the annual review of the NATO defence build-up by the Council as provided in paragraph 17(b) (ii) of the resolution on the report by the Temporary Council Committee (C9–D/20).⁷

12. This procedure should also be applied to Infrastructure programming in other Supreme Commands which should be completed in time to enable the countries concerned to make the necessary budgetary provision for their shares of the cost.

1. This report was adopted by the Council without discussion at its fifth and final meeting, Feb. 25; see an account of the meeting in telegram Secto 79, Feb. 25, from Lisbon, p. 157. A summary of this report was transmitted in telegram Secto 89, Feb. 26, CFM files, lot M 88, box 161, “Secto–Tosec”.
2. The Council meeting of the afternoon of Feb. 20 was reported upon in telegram Secto 28, Feb. 21, p. 114. The 10 countries represented on the Committee were: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, United Kingdom, and United States. Secretary of Defense Lovett represented the United States.
3. Dated Feb. 9, 1952, not printed. In response to a recommendation to the Council at its Eighth Session in Rome in November 1951, the Council Deputies had prepared the report on the basis of reports by the Military Committee of NATO and after consultation with representatives of the NATO Standing Group and SHAPE. The six-page report was not discussed by the Council at Lisbon.
4. Not printed, but see footnote 9, p. 116.
5. None of the cited documents are printed.
6. The United Kingdom contribution will be furnished to the greatest extent possible in kind, and host countries will undertake to accept a contribution in kind from the United Kingdom to the greatest extent the programme will bear to a maximum of 20 million pounds. [Footnote in the source text.]
6. Not printed.
7. Dated Feb. 23, p. 220.