396.1 LO/10–254

Telegraphic Summary by the United States Delegation1
Chairman opened eighth plenary session at 1645 Friday afternoon. He noted that a text had been agreed upon between French and Italian delegations concerning strength and armaments on continent [Page 1322] of internal defense forces and of police belonging members Brussels Treaty Organization.2
Chairman then turned to statement made by Adenauer at fourth plenary session September 29 concerning proposed declarations by Federal Government and by western powers. Requested that these assurances be renewed in light changed circumstances. Chairman referred document to experts to agree on appropriate language.3
Chairman then asked for report from working group on control armaments. Chairman of group stated that it had not completed discussion on Spaak paper4 and had not yet considered paper distributed by Mendes-France on arms pool.5 Mendes-France immediately stated, that report by chairman working group did not correspond in any way to proposals made by French delegation. He went on to say that he was under impression there had been large measure agreement on control proposals made by French Government seeking establish very strict system limitation and control aimed at reassuring public opinion. On other hand, wide divergence opinion between several delegations existed on question production. He stated that proposals of working group are disappointing concerning control and leave almost nothing of proposals for production made by French delegation.
Recess followed after which Canadian Foreign Minister Pearson listed main difficulties before conference in this field: (1) Definition strategic areas; (2) which arms should be prohibited from manufacture in such areas; (3) problem of establishing agency for limitation and control certain other armaments. Suggested that there be agreement in principle that (1) there must be a strategic area; (2) that manufacture certain arms in that area must be prohibited; and (3) that there must be agency for limitation and control armaments. After conference agreed to these principles it should then set up working group which will attempt convert principles into practical detail. Further proposed that during interim period commitments should be [Page 1323] taken not to manufacture certain armaments in areas where they are not now being manufactured. Suggested that interim period be defined pending coming into being Brussels organization. Suggested that decisions taken by working group should be reached by simple majority or by two-thirds. Said that if working group failed reach solution “bets would be of [off]” but said he felt certain this would not happen in practice.
Secretary Dulles then said he had been thinking broadly along same lines Canadian Foreign Minister. Pointed out all agreed desirable establish agency under Brussels Treaty generally controlling and supervising production arms. Pointed out number factors have to be dealt with which means that time must elapse before agency can be established. Secretary then suggested in response to French Parliamentary requirements that Germany undertake not to manufacture armaments listed in Annex 2, Article 107 of EDC Treaty. Further said that considerable proportion 12 German divisions would be supplied by United States and that gap remaining complete full equipment could be filled by German production limited to that purpose only. Suggested period of say two years elapse before Brussels organization established and that agency should be created on basis of either majority or two-thirds member countries.
Chancellor Adenauer made point that Federal Republic cannot put divisions into field unless these supplied with best of arms.
Netherlands Foreign Minister Beyen then pointed out that no chance whatever exists that any government or Parliament in Holland would ever agree to accepting verdict majority vote on such an issue.
Adenauer asked that proposal be submitted in writing and repeated his previous statement.
Belgian Foreign Minister Spaak expressed difficulty in postponing solution problem arms control and production for two years and that such delay would weaken parliamentary position all governments. Deplored excessive pessimism on report experts on committee. Emphasized degree of agreement already reached and that difficulty due to fact that yesterday everyone had accepted principle of strategically exposed zones but could not agree as to definition. Proposed conference should consider entirely new approach instead of system based on EDC Treaty text. Suggested that continental members Brussels Pact Organization should agree not manufacture categories A, B, C unless authorized by Brussels Treaty Organization. Proposed they should only manufacture weapons necessary for their own arms and equipment and that means of control which could be devised would be amply sufficient and water tight.
  1. Transmitted to the Department of State in telegram Secto 20, Oct. 2, and repeated to Bonn, Rome, Ottawa, Luxembourg, The Hague, Brussels, and Paris for USRO, CINCEUR, and Reinhardt. A 27-page verbatim record of this meeting is in the Conference files, lot 60 D 627, CF 368. The list of principal participants, not provided in the source text, was taken from the verbatim record.
  2. The text under reference was contained in document NPC (54) 30 of Oct. 1 and concerned a revision of paragraph 2 of document NPC (54) 26, the Second Report by the Working Party on German Defense Contribution. Neither of these documents is printed in this compilation but both are in Conference files, lot 60 D 627, CF 364–365. For information concerning the reports of this Working Party, see footnote 4, p. 1316.
  3. Adenauer’s statement concerning these proposed declarations was circulated as document NPC (54)21, a copy of which is in the Conference files, lot 60 D 627, CF 364.
  4. This is a reference to the Belgian memorandum, which was circulated as NPC (54) 16 of Sept. 29, printed on p. 1336.
  5. Presumably a reference to the French memorandum, which was circulated as NPC (54) 1 of Sept. 27, printed on p. 1332.