740.5/9–1654: Telegram
The United States Permanent Representative on the North Atlantic Council (Hughes) to the Department of State
Polto 434. Pass Secretary Defense. Subj: SG NAC mtg Sept 15, 1954.
At SG suggestion order of discussion of items I and II on agenda SG NAC mtg was reversed.
Item II—Progress Report on Capabilities Studies.
As Chairman SG Gen. Collins reviewed history capabilities studies starting with last December’s council directive.1 Recalled schedule for processing studies which SG had announced to NAC last April.2 Said SG had been studying SACEUR, SACLANT and CHANCOM studies since their receipt by SG in July. Noted Supreme Commanders’ studies had contained certain assumptions as to means of delivery of atomics; that these assumptions had been deleted from the studies [Page 523] prior to their dispatch by Standing Group this week to appropriate national military authorities of NATO countries in view of their highly classified nature. Present schedule calls for receipt comment on these studies by Nov 15. Expected that military comite will be able consider comment and submit report to NAC by Dec 1, thus allowing possibly ten days to two weeks for consideration report prior ministerial mtg. Gen. Collins said he recognized this schedule may seem slow to some members NAC but emphasized extreme complexity of studies and noted their processing simply cld not have been accelerated. Added might be possible circulate SG staff paper commenting on supreme commanders’ capabilities studies to national military authorities about Oct 1.
Gen. Collins emphasized, first, there was nothing in these studies which wld change urgent requirement that 1954 AR shld be completed and its recommendations implemented; noted any changes in defense programs which might result from studies wld be evolutionary in nature and not revolutionary. Went on to say new weapons must eventually be integrated with “conventional” weapons. Mentioned example of infantry division which might be reorganized as result of studies but which wld still have to be equipped with such conventional weapons as rifles, mortars, etc. Added that new weapons wld be supplemental to old.
Secondly, Gen. Collins made clear the capabilities studies emphasized necessity for effective German contribution to defense of Western Europe. This point was also underlined during ensuing stages of discussion not only with respect to capabilities studies but with respect to progress report on air defense study. In addition above two points Gen. Collins expressed view that present capabilities studies were only first of a series of studies implementation of which might well extend over a period of three to five years. He also pointed out nothing in studies provided any basis for delay in implementation recommendations 1953 AR.
Following above report Gen. Collins speaking as U.S. Rep on SG said that since assumption of a German contribution is integral part of capabilities studies and as position of U.S. military authorities must be based on realistic possibilities of attainment, U.S. JCS wld reserve their final comment on capabilities studies until possibility of an effective German contribution had been clarified. Because of this, from U.S. point of view SG draft report which was proposed for circulation to appropriate national military authorities on or about Oct 1 must for time being be considered as international working paper only.
After above statement Belgian NAC rep asked Gen. Collins to explain more fully what his comment as U.S. rep on standing group meant. Gen. Collins noted that U.S. JCS had simply reserved their [Page 524] judgment, that this did not mean they either disapproved or approved paper. Dutch NAC rep then asked whether, until German situation clarified, U.S. JCS wld cooperate in meanwhile, and Gen. Collins affirmed that they wld. U.K. NAC rep wanted to know whether it wld be possible to stick to timetable in view U.S. JCS stand. Expressed hope answer on Germany wld be coming soon but wanted to know whether ministers cld expect discuss fully agreed study at December mtg. Thought it wld not be disastrous if they did not. U.S. NAC rep said U.S. del was also hopeful clarification German situation upcoming soon, thus permitting circulation fully approved capabilities study on schedule. Dutch NAC rep noted that even if there were delay in circulation study there wld be no reason to delay Dec ministerial mtg on tri AR. Ismay seconded this and went on to elaborate procedure by which international working paper wld be processed before receiving ultimate approval by SG. U.K. NAC rep asked what wld be final date by which German situation wld have to be clarified to permit circulation of SG approved report on capabilities studies to NAC on Dec 1.
Gen. Collins said Nov 15 appeared to be latest possible date if schedule were to be maintained; pointed out however SG in mentioning date of Nov 15 was not trying to issue edict to council.
[Here follows a discussion of “Analysis of Reports Submitted by Countries on Progress Made in Implementing Agreed Force Goals and Recommendations Put Forward in 1953 Annual Review”; “Progress Report on Air Defense Studies”; and “Timing and Form of Annual Review Report”.]