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

662A.00/3–3152: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom ¹

secret

Washington, April 14, 1952—6:42 p.m.

5208. 1. Urtel s 4341² and 4342³ Mar 31, rptd Paris 2020 and 2021, Bonn 444 and 445. Dept is prepared to approve revised draft statement to be made at time of signature of contractuals with fol modifications:

(a) Deletion of “Ger” before “militarism” at end of second sentence Para 1. We believe it desirable to eliminate specific reference to Ger militarism in order to avoid striking unnecessarily sour note at time of signings, and this wld conform with the phrase used in para 6 of the tripartite reply of Mar 25 to Sov note on Ger.

(b) Since language in second sentence of original para 3 conforms with Senate res of Apr 1951 on stationing of U.S. forces abroad,⁴ we consider it necessary to retain such language in any statement we make. We are prepared, however, to accept language of second part of last sentence of alternative para proposed by FonOff. We have no rpt no objection to placing resulting sentence at end of para. As revised it wld read “Furthermore they have each expressed their resolve to station such forces in Eur as may be necessary and appropriate to contribute their fair share to the joint defense of the North Atlantic area, having regard to their interest in the integrity of the EDC, their obligations under the NAT, and their special responsibilities in Ger”.

2. Brit Emb has informed us FonOff reason for suggesting alternative para 3 is that language of last sentence is taken from tripartite security guarantee for FedRep and Berlin agreed with Adenauer at Paris in Nov 1951 (Secto 63 Nov 22 rptd London 837 Bonn 86)⁵ and they consider various Allied statements on this subj shld conform as closely as possible to each other. We hope they will be prepared accept formulation in para 1 above for reasons stated, however.

3. We also understand Brit FonOff is of opinion tripartite security guarantee mentioned para 2 above will still be issued at time of signing of contractual conventions. Although there was no discussion of this point at London and Lisbon we have been proceeding on assumption NATO security guarantee to EDC adopted at Lisbon had superseded tripartite guarantee and in fact made latter unnecessary. Believe system of mutual security guarantees being worked out between NATO, EDC and Brussels Pact countries is more than adequate and issuance further tripartite guarantee to FedRep and Berlin wld be not only redundant but confusing. Brit point out Berlin not covered by NATO–EDC guarantee, which is true, but we believe Berlin is adequately protected by N.Y. FonMins tripartite guarantee to FedRep and Berlin⁶ as well as language Art 6 of NAT as modified by Greek-Turkish Protocol.⁷ In view this difference of opinion request you discuss status tripartite guarantee with respective FonOffs urgently. You shld put forward views outlined above, pointing out that at time tripartite guarantee was agreed at Paris system of mutual NATO–EDC security guarantees had not been worked out. We wld hope UK, Fr and Ger govts will accept our view that additional tripartite guarantee as worked out in Paris no longer necessary.

4. Brit Emb also informs us FonOff considers suggested statement (London’s 4342) wld be tripartite. We had assumed it wld be US–UK statement since it deals primarily with bilateral assurances re EDC. This still seems preferable to us but if Brit and Fr FonOffs strongly prefer tripartite statement we wld not insist on this point.⁸

Acheson

1. Drafted by Calhoun of GPA, cleared by Lewis of GER, Perkins, and Bruce. Repeated to Paris and Bonn.
2. Not printed; see footnote 2, p. 634.
3. Ante, p. 634.
4. Regarding the “Great Debate” concerning the stationing of U.S. forces in Europe which resulted in the Senate Resolution of April 1951, see the editorial note, Foreign Relations, 1951, vol. iii, Part 1, p. 22.
5. For text of the communiqué, see ibid., Part 2, p. 1607.
6. Documentation on the Meetings of the Foreign Ministers of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, at New York, Sept. 12–19, 1950 is presented in Foreign Relations, 1950, vol. iii, pp. 1108 ff.
7. The Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession of Greece and Turkey, signed at London on Oct. 22, 1951 is printed in NATO: Facts About The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO Information Service, Paris, January 1962, pp. 201–202. Documentation on developments leading to the Protocol is printed in Foreign Relations, 1951, vol. iii, Part 1, pp. 480 ff. and 616 ff.
8. For another draft of the proposed tripartite declaration and the Department’s comments on it, see telegrams 6671, Apr. 30, from Paris, and 6494, May 3, to Paris, pp. 645 and 647, respectively.