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

740.5/2–454: Telegram

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

secret

Washington, February 4, 1954—5:28 p.m.

4014. 1. Dept concerned over numerous recent reports French Govt may be considering at this time proposing modifications EDC treaty. So far other EDC Govts appear to have held firm line against such efforts by French. Bruce Mission reports EDC/IC representatives govts other than France state their govts believe French committed themselves at Rome year ago² not to seek any further protocols to treaty; that this commitment has been reaffirmed on other occasions by both Mayer and Laniel Govts; that other govts have proceeded (and in some cases virtually completed) their ratification processes on basis this French commitment. EDC/IC representatives also stated that their govts are firmly opposed to any modifications in present text treaty or to any suggestions which would lead to new negotiations among six govts.

2. Although above indicates other EDC countries can be depended upon to hold line firmly against any modifications, likely that subject will come up again and US representatives should be in position express US views. Accordingly, following points should be made fully clear as opportunities offer to representatives EDC governments other than France (However, care should be taken avoid giving impression US launching major “campaign” on this matter):

(a) US opposed to any attempt to modify EDC treaty. In view of fact that other countries have proceeded so far with ratification, any changes in treaty inevitably will result in prolonged disruption and delay.

(b) Time factor of crucial importance to US. Congressional patience nearly at an end. Results will be most serious unless action completed in very near future.

(c) Facts of political life in Germany also make prompt action essential; further prolonged delay in granting German independence can very adversely affect present favorable orientation German government and people.

(d) Hence in our view any efforts now to re-open or modify treaty would seriously prejudice attainment our objectives.³

Smith

1. Drafted by Fessenden, cleared by Fisher and Moore, and initialed for the Acting Secretary by Bonbright. Sent also to The Hague, Brussels, Rome, Bonn, and Luxembourg and repeated to Paris and Berlin.
2. Regarding the meeting of the Interim Committee of the EDC at Rome, Feb. 25–26, 1953, see footnote 2, p. 755.
3. In telegram Dulte 39 from Berlin, Feb. 5, Dulles informed the Department of State that Bidault had informed him at lunch that day “that he considered talk about amending EDC as rumors inevitable at this time but not serious. I think undesirable to send personal emissary to Laniel certainly unless Bidault knew and approved this tactic. Also feel we cannot wisely intervene until results Berlin are finalized. Hope all possible will be done to assure early Belgian action. Bruce has read and concurs this message” (740.5/2–554).