Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Western European Security, Volume V, Part 2

Conference files, lot 60 D 627, cf 369

Final Act of the Nine-Power Conference Held in London Between the Twenty-Eigth of September and the Third of October, Nineteenth Hundred and Fifty-Four¹

London, October 3, 1954

The Conference of the Nine Powers, Belgium, Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States met in London from Tuesday the Twenty-eighth of September, Nineteen hundred and Fifty-four, to Sunday the Third of October, Nineteen hundred and Fifty-four. It dealt with the most important issues facing the Western world, security and European integration within the framework of a developing Atlantic community dedicated to peace and freedom. In this connexion the Conference considered how to assure the full association of the Federal Republic of Germany with the West and the German Defence contribution.

• Belgium was represented by His Excellency Monsieur P-H. SPAAK.
• Canada was represented by the Honourable L. B. Pearson.
• France was represented by His Excellency Monsieur P. Mendès-France.
• The Federal Republic of Germany was represented by His Excellency Dr. K. Adenauer.
• Italy was represented by His Excellency Professor G. Martino.
• Luxembourg was represented by His Excellency Monsieur J. Bech.
• The Netherlands was represented by His Excellency J. W. Beyen.
• The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was represented by the Rt. Hon. A. Eden, M.C., M.P.
• The United States of America was represented by the Honourable J. F. Dulles.

All the decisions of the Conference formed part of one general settlement which is, directly or indirectly, of concern to all the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Powers, and which will therefore be submitted to the North Atlantic Council for information or decision.

I.—Germany

The Governments of France, the United Kingdom and the United States declare that their policy is to end the Occupation régime in the Federal Republic as soon as possible, to revoke the Occupation Statute and to abolish the Allied High Commission. The Three Governments will continue to discharge certain responsibilities in Germany arising out of the international situation.

It is intended to conclude, and to bring into force as soon as the necessary parliamentary procedures have been completed, the appropriate instruments for these purposes. General agreement has already been reached on the content of these instruments, and representatives of the Four Governments will meet in the very near future to complete the final texts. The agreed arrangements may be put into effect either before or simultaneously with the arrangements for the German defence contribution.

As these arrangements will take a little time to complete, the Three Governments have in the meantime issued the following Declaration of Intent:—

“Recognising that this great country can no longer be deprived of the rights properly belonging to a free and democratic people; and

“Desiring to associate the Federal Republic of Germany on a footing of equality with their efforts for peace and security:

“The Governments of France, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America desire to end the Occupation régime as soon as possible.

“The fulfilment of this policy calls for the settlement of problems of detail in order to liquidate the past and to prepare for the future, and requires the completion of appropriate Parliamentary procedures.

“In the meantime, the Three Governments are instructing their High Commissioners to act forthwith in accordance with the spirit of the above policy. In particular, the High Commissioners will not use the powers which are to be relinquished unless in agreement with the Federal Government, except in the fields of disarmament and demilitarisation and in cases where the Federal Government has not been able for legal reasons to take the action or assume the obligations contemplated in the agreed arrangement.”

II.—Brussels Treaty

The Brussels Treaty will be strengthened and extended to make it a more effective focus of European integration.

For this purpose the following arrangements have been agreed upon:—

(a) The Federal Republic of Germany and Italy will be invited to accede to the Treaty, suitably modified to emphasise the objective of European unity, and they have declared themselves ready to do so. The system of mutual automatic assistance in case of attack will thus be extended to the Federal Republic of Germany and Italy.

(b) The structure of the Brussels Treaty will be reinforced. In particular the Consultative Council provided in the Treaty will become a Council with powers of decision.

(c) The activities of the Brussels Treaty Organisation will be extended to include further important tasks as follows:—

• The size and general characteristics of the German defence contribution will conform to the contribution fixed for E.D.C.
• The maximum defence contribution to N.A.T.O. of all members of the Brussels Treaty Organisation will be determined by a special agreement fixing levels which can only be increased by unanimous consent.
• The strength and armaments of the internal defence forces and the police on the Continent of the countries members of the Brussels Treaty Organisation will be fixed by agreements within that Organisation, having regard to their proper functions and to existing levels and needs.

The Brussels Treaty Powers agree to set up, as part of the Brussels Treaty Organisation, an Agency for the control of armaments on the Continent of Europe of the continental members of the Brussels Treaty Organisation. The detailed provisions are as follows:—

1. The functions of the Agency shall be:—

(a) to ensure that the prohibition of the manufacture of certain types of armaments as agreed between the Brussels Powers is being observed;

(b) to control the level of stocks held by each country on the Continent of the types of armaments mentioned in the following paragraph. This control shall extend to production and imports to the extent required to make the control of stocks effective.

2. The types of armament to be controlled under 1(b) above shall be:—

(a) weapons in categories I, II and III listed in Annex II to Article 107 of the E.D.C. Treaty;

(b) weapons in the other categories listed in Annex II to Article 107 of the E.D.C. Treaty;

(c) a list of major weapons taken from Annex I to the same Article, to be established hereafter by an expert working group.

Measures will be taken to exclude from control materials and products in the above lists for civil use.

3. As regards the weapons referred to under paragraph 2(a) above, when the countries which have not given up the right to produce them have passed the experimental stage and start effective production, the level of stocks that they will be allowed to hold on the Continent shall be decided by the Brussels Treaty Council by a majority vote.

4. The continental members of the Brussels Treaty Organisation agree not to build up stocks nor to produce the armaments mentioned in paragraph 2(b) and (c) beyond the limits required (a) for the equipment of their forces, taking into account any imports including external aid, and (b) for export.

5. The requirements for their N.A.T.O. forces shall be established on the basis of the results of the Annual Review and the recommendations of the N.A.T.O. military authorities.

6. For forces remaining under national control, the level of stocks must correspond to the size and mission of those forces. That level shall be notified to the Agency.

7. All imports or exports of the controlled arms will be notified to the Agency.

8. The Agency will operate through the collation and examination of statistical and budgetary data. It will undertake test checks and will make such visits and inspections as may be required to fulfil its functions as defined in paragraph 1 above.

9. The basic rules of procedure for the Agency shall be laid down in a Protocol to the Brussels Treaty.

10. If the Agency finds that the prohibitions are not being observed, or that the appropriate level of stocks is being exceeded, it will so inform the Brussels Council.

11. The Agency will report and be responsible to the Brussels Council which will take its decisions by a majority vote on questions submitted by the Agency.

12. The Brussels Council will make an Annual Report on its activities concerning the control of armaments to the Delegates of the Brussels Treaty Powers to the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe.

13. The Governments of the United States of America and Canada will notify the Brussels Treaty Organisation of the military aid to be distributed to the continental members of that Organisation. The Organisation may make written observations.

14. The Brussels Council will establish a Working Group in order to study the draft directive presented by the French Government and any other papers which may be submitted on the subject of armaments production and standardisation.

15. The Brussels Treaty Powers have taken note of the following Declaration of the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany and record their agreement with it:

The Federal Chancellor declares:

• that the Federal Republic undertakes not to manufacture in its territory any atomic weapons, chemical weapons or biological weapons, as detailed in paragraphs I, II and III of the attached list;
• that it undertakes further not to manufacture in its territory such weapons as those detailed in paragraphs IV, V and VI of the attached list. Any amendment to or cancellation of the substance of paragraphs IV, V and VI can, on the request of the Federal Republic, be carried out by a resolution of the Brussels Council of Ministers by a two-thirds majority, if in accordance with the needs of the armed forces a request is made by the competent supreme Commander of N.A.T.O.;
• that the Federal Republic agrees to supervision by the competent authority of the Brussels Treaty Organisation to ensure that these undertakings are observed.

List Appended to the Declaration by the Federal Chancellor

This list comprises the weapons defined in paragraphs I to VI and the factories earmarked solely for their production. All apparatus, parts, equipment, installations, substances and organisms which are used for civilian purposes or for scientific, medical and industrial research in the fields of pure and applied science shall be excluded from this definition.

I.—Atomic Weapons

(a) An atomic weapon is defined as any weapon which contains, or is designed to contain or utilise, nuclear fuel or radioactive isotopes and which, by explosion or other uncontrolled nuclear transformation of the nuclear fuel, or by radioactivity of the nuclear fuel or radioactive isotopes, is capable of mass destruction, mass injury or mass poisoning.

(b) Furthermore, any part, device, assembly or material especially designed for, or primarily useful in, any weapon as set forth under paragraph (a), shall be deemed to be an atomic weapon.

(c) Nuclear fuel as used in the preceding definition includes plutonium, Uranium 233, Uranium 235 (including Uranium 235 contained in Uranium enriched to over 21 per cent. by weight of Uranium 235) and any other material capable of releasing substantial quantities of atomic energy through nuclear fission or fusion or other nuclear reaction of the material. The foregoing materials are considered to be nuclear fuel regardless of the chemical or physical form in which they exist.

II.—Chemical Weapons

(a) A chemical weapon is defined as any equipment or apparatus expressly designed to use, for military purposes, the asphyxiating, toxic, irritant, paralysant, growth-regulating, anti-lubricating or catalyzing properties of any chemical substance.

(b) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (c), chemical substances, having such properties and capable of being used in the equipment or apparatus referred to in paragraph (a), shall be deemed to be included in this definition.

(c) Such equipment or apparatus and such quantities of the chemical substances as are referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) which do not exceed peaceful civilian requirements shall be deemed to be excluded from this definition.

III.—Biological Weapons

(a) A biological weapon is defined as any equipment or apparatus expressly designed to use, for military purposes, harmful insects or other living or dead organisms, or their toxic products.

(b) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (c), insects, organisms and their toxic products of such nature and in such amounts as to make them capable of being used in the equipment of apparatus referred to in (a) shall be deemed to be included in this definition.

(c) Such equipment or apparatus and such quantities of the insects, organisms and their toxic products as are referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) which do not exceed peaceful civilian requirements shall be deemed to be excluded from the definition of biological weapons.

IV.—Long-range Missiles, Guided Missiles, and Influence Mines

(a) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (d), long-range missiles and guided missiles are defined as missiles such that the velocity or direction of motion can be influenced after the instant of launch by a device or mechanism inside or outside the missile, including V-type weapons developed in the recent war and subsequent modifications thereof. Combustion is considered as mechanism which may influence the velocity.

(b) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (d), influence mines are defined as naval mines which can be exploded automatically by influences which emanate solely from external sources, including influence mines developed in the recent war and subsequent modifications thereof.

(c) Parts, devices or assemblies specially designed for use in or with the weapons referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) shall be deemed to be included in these definitions.

(d) Proximity fuses, and short-range guided missiles for antiaircraft defence with the following maximum characteristics, are regarded as excluded from this definition:—

• Length, 2 metres;
• Diameter, 30 centimetres;
• Velocity, 660 metres per second;
• Ground range, 32 kilometres;
• Weight of war-head, 22·5 kilogrammes.

V.—Warships, with the Exception of Smaller Ships for Defence Purposes

“Warships, with the exception of smaller ships for defence purposes” are:—

(a) Warships of more than 3, 000 tons displacement.

(b) Submarines of more than 350 tons displacement.

(c) All warships which are driven by means other than steam, Diesel or petrol engines or by gas turbines or by jet engines.

VI.—Bomber Aircraft for Strategic Purposes

The closest possible co-operation with N.A.T.O. shall be established in all fields.

III.—United States, United Kingdom and Canadian Assurances

The United States Secretary of State set forth the willingness of the United States to continue its support for European unity, in accordance with the following statement:—

“If, using the Brussels Treaty as a nucleus, it is possible to find in this new pattern a continuing hope of unity among the countries of Europe that are represented here, and if the hopes that were tied into the European Defence Community Treaty can reasonably be transferred into the arrangements which will be the outgrowth of this meeting, then I would certainly be disposed to recommend to the President that he should renew the assurance offered last spring in connection with the European Defence Community Treaty to the effect that the United States will continue to maintain in Europe, including Germany, such units of its armed forces as may be necessary and appropriate to contribute its fair share of the forces needed for the joint defence of the North Atlantic area while a threat to the area exists and will continue to deploy such forces in accordance with agreed North Atlantic strategy for the defence of this area.”

The United Kingdom confirmed its active participation in the Brussels Treaty Organisation and gave the following assurance about the maintenance of United Kingdom forces on the continent of Europe:—

“The United Kingdom will continue to maintain on the mainland of Europe, including Germany, the effective strength of the United Kingdom forces now assigned to SACEUR, four divisions and the Tactical Air Force, or whatever SACEUR regards as equivalent fighting capacity. The United Kingdom undertakes not to withdraw those forces against the wishes of the majority of the Brussels Treaty Powers, who should take their decision in the knowledge of SACEUR’s views.

“This undertaking would be subject to the understanding that an acute overseas emergency might oblige Her Majesty’s Government to omit this procedure.

“If the maintenance of United Kingdom forces on the mainland of Europe throws at any time too heavy a strain on the external finances of the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom will invite the North Atlantic Council to review the financial conditions on which the formations are maintained.”

Canada reaffirmed in the following statement its resolve to discharge the continuing obligations arising out of its membership in N.A.T.O. and its support of the objective of European unity:—

“As far as we are concerned, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation remains the focal point of our participation in collective defence and of our hope for the development of closer co-operation with the other peoples of the Atlantic community. As such, it remains a foundation of Canadian foreign policy. While we emphasise, then, our belief in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, we welcome the proposed extension of the Brussels Treaty. We shall look forward to a growing relationship, within the framework of N.A.T.O., with the new Brussels Treaty Organisation, composed of countries with whom we are already bound by such close ties.”

IV.—North Atlantic Treaty Organisation

The powers present at the Conference which are members of N.A.T.O. agreed to recommend at the next ministerial meeting of the North Atlantic Council that the Federal Republic of Germany should forthwith be invited to become a member.

They further agreed to recommend to N.A.T.O. that its machinery be reinforced in the following respects:—

(a) All forces of N.A.T.O. countries stationed on the Continent of Europe shall be placed under the authority of SACEUR, with the exception of those which N.A.T.O. has recognised or will recognise as suitable to remain under national command.

(b) Forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent shall be deployed in accordance with N.A.T.O. strategy.

(c) The location of such forces shall be determined by SACEUR after consultation and agreement with the national authorities concerned.

(d) Such forces shall not be redeployed on the Continent nor used operationally on the Continent without his consent, subject to appropriate political guidance from the North Atlantic Council.

(e) Forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent shall be integrated as far as possible consistent with military efficiency.

(f) Arrangements shall be made for the closer co-ordination of logistics by SACEUR.

(g) The level and effectiveness of forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent and the armaments and equipment, logistics, and reserve formations of those forces on the Continent shall be inspected by SACEUR.

The Conference recorded the view of all the governments represented that the North Atlantic Treaty should be regarded as of indefinite duration.

V.—Declaration by the Federal Government of Germany and Joint Declaration by the Governments of France, United Kingdom and United States of America

The following declarations were recorded at the Conference by the German Federal Chancellor and by the Foreign Ministers of France, United Kingdom and United States of America:—

Declaration by Federal Republic of Germany

The Federal Republic of Germany has agreed to conduct its policy in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and accepts the obligations set forth in Article 2 of the Charter.

Upon her accession to the North Atlantic Treaty and the Brussels Treaty, the Federal Republic of Germany declares that she will refrain from any action inconsistent with the strictly defensive character of the two treaties. In particular the Federal Republic of Germany undertakes never to have recourse to force to achieve the reunification of Germany or the modification of the present boundaries of the Federal Republic of Germany, and to resolve by peaceful means any disputes which may arise between the Federal Republic and other States.

Declaration by the Governments of United States of America, United Kingdom and France

The Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Republic,

Being resolved to devote their efforts to the strengthening of peace in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and in particular with the obligations set forth in Article 2 of the Charter

(i) to settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered;

(ii) to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations;

(iii) to give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the Charter, and to refrain from giving assistance to any State against which the United Nations take preventive or enforcement action;

(iv) to ensure that States which are not members of the United Nations act in accordance with the principles of the Charter so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security,

Having regard to the purely defensive character of the Atlantic Alliance which is manifest in the North Atlantic Treaty, wherein they reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all Governments, and undertake to settle their international disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the principles of the Charter and to refrain, in accordance with those principles, from the threat or use of force in their international relations,

Take note that the Federal Republic of Germany has by a Declaration dated the Third of October, Nineteen hundred and Fifty Four accepted the obligations set forth in Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations and has undertaken never to have recourse to force to achieve the reunification of Germany or the modification of the present boundaries of the Federal Republic of Germany, and to resolve by peaceful means any disputes which may arise between the Federal Republic and other states:

Declare That

1. They consider the Government of the Federal Republic as the only German Government freely and legitimately constituted and therefore entitled to speak for Germany as the representative of the German people in international affairs.

2. In their relations with the Federal Republic they will follow the principles set out in Article 2 of the United Nations Charter.

3. A peace settlement for the whole of Germany, freely negotiated between Germany and her former enemies, which should lay the foundation of a lasting peace, remains an essential aim of their policy. The final determination of the boundaries of Germany must await such a settlement.

4. The achievement through peaceful means of a fully free and unified Germany remains a fundamental goal of their policy.

5. The security and welfare of Berlin and the maintenance of the position of the Three Powers there are regarded by the Three Powers as essential elements of the peace of the free world in the present international situation. Accordingly they will maintain armed forces within the territory of Berlin as long as their responsibilities require it. They therefore reaffirm that they will treat any attack against Berlin from any quarter as an attack upon their forces and themselves.

6. They will regard as a threat to their own peace and safety any recourse to force which in violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter threatens the integrity and unity of the Atlantic alliance or its defensive purposes. In the event of any such action, the three Governments, for their part, will consider the offending government as having forfeited its rights to any guarantee and any military assistance provided for in the North Atlantic Treaty and its protocols. They will act in accordance with Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty with a view to taking other measures which may be appropriate.

7. They will invite the association of other member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation with this Declaration.

VI.—Future Procedure

The Conference agreed that representatives of the governments concerned should work out urgently the texts of detailed agreements to give effect to the principles laid down above. These will be submitted where appropriate, to the North Atlantic Council, and to the four Governments directly concerned with the future status of the Federal Republic. The Conference hoped that it would be possible to hold a ministerial meeting of the North Atlantic Council on the Twenty-second of October to decide on the arrangements affecting N.A.T.O. This will be preceded by meetings of the four Foreign Ministers on the question of German sovereignty and of the nine Foreign Ministers.

These agreements and arrangements constitute a notable contribution to world peace. A Western Europe is now emerging which, resting on the close association of the United Kingdom with the Continent and on the growing friendship between the participating countries, will reinforce the Atlantic community. The system elaborated by the Conference will further the development of European unity and integration.

The following documents are annexed to and form part of the Final Act:—

Draft Declaration and Draft Protocol to the Brussels Treaty.

Full text of statements by Mr. Dulles, Mr. Eden and Mr. Pearson at the Fourth Plenary Meeting on the Twenty-ninth of September.

Conference Paper on “A German Defence contribution and arrangements to apply to SACEUR’s forces on the Continent.”

In witness whereof the Representatives have signed this Final Act.

Done in London this Third day of October, 1954, in a single copy, in English, French and German, all three texts being equally authoritative. The original texts will be deposited with the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which shall transmit certified copies thereof to each Government represented at the Conference.

For Belgium:	P. H. Spaak
For Canada:	L. B. Pearson
For the Federal Republic of Germany:	Adenauer
For France:	P. Mendès-France
For Italy:	G. Martino
For Luxembourg:	Jos. Bech
For the Netherlands:	J. W. Beyen
For the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland:	Anthony Eden
For the United States of America:	John Foster Dulles

Annex I

Draft Declaration Inviting Italy and the Federal Republic of Germany to Accede to the Brussels Treaty

The Governments of Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, parties to the Brussels Treaty of 17th March, 1948, for collaboration in economic, social and cultural matters and for legitimate collective self-defence;

Aware that the principles underlying the association created by the Brussels Treaty are also recognised and applied by the Federal Republic of Germany and Italy;

Noting with satisfaction that their devotion to peace and their allegiance to democratic institutions constitute common bonds between the countries of Western Europe;

Convinced that an association with the Federal Republic of Germany and Italy would represent a new and substantial advance in the direction already indicated by the Treaty;

Decide

In application of Article IX of the Treaty, to invite the Federal Republic of Germany and Italy to accede to the Brussels Treaty, as revised and completed by the Protocol and [list of agreements and documents]^* of_________________.²

Draft Protocol to the Brussels Treaty

His Majesty the King of the Belgians, the President of the French Republic, President of the French Union, Her Royal Highness the Grand Duchess of Luxembourg, Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands and Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Parties to the Treaty of Economic, Social and Cultural Collaboration and Collective Self-defence, signed at Brussels on March 17th, 1948, hereinafter referred to as the Treaty, on the one hand,

and the President of the Federal Republic of Germany and the President of the Italian Republic on the other hand,

inspired by a common will to strengthen peace and security,

desirous to this end of promoting the unity and of encouraging the progressive integration of Europe,

convinced that the accession of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Italian Republic to the Treaty will represent a new and substantial advance towards these aims:

Have appointed, &c._______________________²

Have agreed as follows:—

article i

The Federal Republic of Germany and the Italian Republic hereby accede to the Treaty, as revised and completed by the present Protocol and the [list of agreements and documents.]^‡

article ii

(a) The sub-paragraph of the Preamble to the Treaty “to take such steps as may be held necessary in the event of renewal by Germany of a policy of aggression” shall be modified to read:—

“to promote the unity and to encourage the progressive integration of Europe.”

(b) the following new article shall be inserted in the Treaty as Article IV:—

“IV. In execution of the Treaty the High Contracting Parties and any organs established by them under the Treaty shall work in close co-operation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.”

The present Article IV of the Treaty and the succeeding articles shall be renumbered accordingly.

(c) Article VIII, formerly Article VII, of the Treaty, shall read:—

“For the purpose of consulting together on all questions dealt with in the present Treaty and its Protocol and the agreements and other documents set out in Article I above and of strengthening peace and security and of promoting unity and of encouraging the progressive integration of Europe and closer co-operation between member states and with other European organisations, the High Contracting Parties will create a Council, which shall be so organised as to be able to exercise its functions continuously. The Council shall meet at such times as it shall deem fit.

“At the request of any of the High Contracting Parties, the Council shall be immediately convened in order to permit the High Contracting Parties to consult with regard to any situation which may constitute a threat to peace, in whatever area this threat should arise, or with regard to any situation constituting a danger to economic stability.”

article iii

The present Protocol and the agreements set out in Article I above shall be ratified and the instruments of ratification shall be deposited as soon as possible with the Belgian Government. They shall enter into force upon the date of deposit of the last instrument of ratification.

Annex II A

Extemporaneous Statement by the United States Secretary of State (The Hon. John Foster Dulles) at the Fourth Plenary Meeting

Mr. Chairman, at the time when we thought that the European Defence Community Treaty would promptly be put to a vote of the French Parliament—that was some time last Spring—the United States indicated that it would be prepared to make a declaration with respect to its intentions as to the maintenance of armed forces in Europe in the event that the European Defence Community Treaty should come into force. The text of that message was communicated to the six nations that were signatory to the European Defence Community Treaty, and also to the United Kingdom. The essence of that declaration was that the United States would continue to maintain in Europe, including Germany, such units of its armed forces as may be necessary to contribute its fair share of the forces needed for the joint defence of the North Atlantic area while the threat to that area exists, and that we would continue to maintain such forces in accordance with the agreed North Atlantic strategy for the defence of this area.

There were other provisions of that Declaration, in fact there were six, one of which related to treating the North Atlantic Treaty as a treaty of indefinite duration, rather than only for a fixed period of years.

I do not need, I think, to read the full text of that Declaration, because it has, as I say, been communicated to all of the Governments who are represented here. You doubtless are already familiar with, and can readily consult, the text which was sent to your at that time.

That Declaration was made, as I say, in anticipation of the coming into force of the European Defence Community Treaty. The Declaration was made after consultation with the leaders of both parties in the Congress of the United States. It would have been as solemn and definitive an obligation as the United States is constitutionally capable of making in this matter.

I should perhaps explain that under our constitutional system the President of the United States is Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the United States, and as such has the right to determine their disposition. That is a right which cannot be impaired by action by the Congress. Also, while Congress has no authority to deprive the President of his right as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces to make such disposition of those forces as he. believes to be in the interest of the security of the United States, it is equally the case that one President of the United States is not constitutionally able to bind his successors in this matter. Each President of the United States comes into office enjoying the right to dispose of the armed forces of the United States as he thinks best serves the interests of the United States in accordance with the advice which he gets from his military advisers. Therefore it is not constitutionally possible for the United States by treaty, by law or any other way to make a legally binding, fixed commitment to maintain any predetermined quota of armed forces in any particular part of the world for any particular period of time. It is nevertheless possible for the President to define a policy which in his opinion makes it appropriate to maintain certain elements of the armed forces of the United States in certain areas in pursuance of that policy. And if the policy is a basic and fundamental one it is extremely unlikely that that allocation of forces would be altered.

Now, this Declaration that I refer to was designed to involve an exercise, to the fullest degree possible under our constitutional system, of the determination of our Government to support the European Defence Community by contributing armed forces which would be subject to integration with its forces, and that declaration was made with the confidence that the policy that it reflected would be pursued because of the very great interest which the United States has in the creation of unity in Europe, and the fact that our nation has historically shown its willingness to make tremendous contributions if, in its opinion, that will aid in the real unification of Europe.

I might recall that the European Recovery Plan—the Marshall Plan as it was called—was made pursuant to a Congressional Act which said that the purpose was to promote the unification of Europe. The North Atlantic Treaty was an engagement which was quite unprecedented for the United States—it was quite unprecedented for the United States to make that kind of long range alliance with other countries. That was directly contrary to our earlier policies which had been pursued for over 100 years. That action was taken only after the European countries themselves had first come together under this Brussels Treaty which we are talking about so much to-day. It was the encouragement which came from that which very largely led to our going on and joining in the commitments of the North Atlantic Treaty.

The first action taken to provide military aid to Europe was under the Military Defence Assistance Act of 1949. The language of it was that it was designed to promote the integration of the defence of Europe. I think that the history of our action, both our positive action and negative action, shows that we respond in many ways like a barometer to the climate which exists in Europe. If the climate is one of unity and cohesion, our assistance and aid of every kind goes out. If the climate is one of dissension, disunity, revival of threats of war, perpetuation of the cycle of recurrent war, then our tendency is to withdraw.

The declaration which we felt able to make in support of the European Defence Community was on the assumption that that was a permanent act which would tie together organically the countries of Europe which in the past have been separate and among whom war has been bred. We felt that it tied them together so permanently, so organically, that we could regard that old chapter as a closed chapter and could hopefully commit our strength to Europe in the confidence that our soldiers over here in Europe would be in a structure which was safe and sound; that we were not putting our troops in the midst of what has historically been the world’s worst fire hazard.

Now a committal of that character is not lightly made, and I would say in all frankness that as the situation stands to-day it would not be possible for the President of the United States to renew that committal. There has been a great wave of disillusionment which has swept over the United States—and it is particularly manifest in the Congress—a great wave of disillusionment over what has happened, and a feeling that after all the situation in Europe is pretty hopeless and the United States had better not make any long-term committals to be part of it.

That conclusion is so disastrous in my opinion—both for the nations of Europe and for the United States—that I hope most ardently that what is done here will make it possible to come to a different conclusion, and that it will change the atmosphere, the feeling, in the United States to a degree which will permit of a renewal of the pledge by the United States to maintain in Europe such elements of its armed forces as may be necessary or appropriate to contribute our fair share of what is needed for the common defence of this North Atlantic area while the threat to that area exists. I cannot say at this moment that a renewal of that commitment is possible. I can say, and must repeat, that as things stand to-day it is not possible. But if, out of the elements of the situation with which we are dealing, if using the Brussels Treaty as a nucleus, it is possible to find in this new pattern a continuing hope of unity among the countries of Europe that are represented here, and if the hopes that were tied into the European Defence Community Treaty can reasonably be transferred into the arrangements which will be the outgrowth of this meeting, then I would certainly be disposed to recommend to the President that he should renew a pledge comparable to that which was offered in connexion with the European Defence Community Treaty.

Obviously the context of the pledge would have to be changed, because in the form which was given it related distinctively to the European Defence Community Treaty. Just what re-phrasing would be required to give it the “new look” that would be appropriate to the new situation, that is a matter which I have not studied, and which could not usefully be studied until we know whether or not a promise of genuine and durable unity will come out of the deliberations of this gathering and those which may succeed it.

That, Mr. Chairman, is as clear a statement as I can make to-day of the position of my Government in relation to this matter. We are extremely anxious to contribute all that we can from a material and constitutional standpoint to promote the kind of unification which will above all end a situation which has led to recurrent wars which have weakened and drained the Western nations so that our whole Western civilisation is in jeopardy as never before in a thousand years. In reason you can count on us. I think that what we have done since the end of the war in terms of economic contribution, military contributions, the willingness to contribute our best and ablest brains in terms of both military and economic matters, all of that I think is a proof which cannot be challenged as to what our disposition is in this matter. You can be confident that that disposition will be reflected by genuine support to the extent that is appropriate if there is, on this side, the movement toward unity, if there is a beacon light still ahead, if we do not feel that we have come to a watershed where efforts toward unity finally are ended and we are going down on the other side into the abyss of continued disunity.

I do not think that is going to happen. I know it is within our power here to be sure that it does not happen. If it does not happen, then you can count on the United States acting in support of what the European countries do. I believe that you will find that the American flag, with all it symbolises, will continue to fly alongside of your own here in Europe.

Annex II B

Statement by the United Kingdom Secretary of State (The Right Hon. Anthony Eden, M.P.) at the Fourth Plenary Meeting

Gentlemen, I think we all feel that we have just listened to a statement from the United States Secretary of State of very rare quality and much valued frankness. What he has said to us, those of us who are European, is I think all that in present conditions we could possibly expect from the United States.

As we survey these post-war years we, I fear, too readily at times take for granted what this generous brother has done for us in Europe at a time when but for his help all must have collapsed in confusion and, perhaps, into Communism also. On behalf of the country I represent here, I would like to assure him that what the United States has done are not “All good deeds past, forgot as soon as done”—but will be remembered with thankfulness, and not for our own sakes alone. So I would like to tell Mr. Foster Dulles that the words he has said, so far as our Government are concerned, will be examined with gratitude and with understanding, and that we shall do our best—I believe this conference will do its best—to prove worthy of that greater confidence the United States will show as we establish our ability to prove our unity and our strength.

Now in all this I am conscious that my own country has a part to play. I do not want to go back over the full history of past declarations and past undertakings, though there are perhaps one or two that I ought to mention if the setting of what I want to say this afternoon is to be understood. We gave, as the United States Government gave, a series of undertakings to the E.D.C. We gave them by treaty, we gave them by agreement, we gave them by declarations, and as I have already informed my colleagues we stand by those undertakings, and we are ready to reaffirm them. They are not, I think, unimportant, but some of them are, it is true, inapplicable in the absence of E.D.C. Some of those that have as a result of the disappearance of E.D.C. now disappeared may, and probably will, be covered by the proposals which this conference is now considering. The provision of automatic military assistance, for instance, which was contained in our treaty with E.D.C. will be reproduced, I trust, by the proposed enlargement of the Brussels Treaty, Co-operation between the armed forces, the deployment and integration of those forces, consultation about the level of forces, will all now take place, though perhaps within a different framework.

I am very conscious, and so are my colleagues, that there is one particular plane on which many of you here would wish us to make our position clearer, and where if we were able to do so it might assist the work of this conference. This relates to the maintenance of British forces on the continent of Europe, and in respect of that I have a new proposal to put to my colleagues. The United Kingdom will continue to maintain on the mainland of Europe, including Germany, the effective strength of the United Kingdom forces now assigned to SACEUR—four divisions and the tactical Air Force—or whatever SACEUR regards as equvalent fighting capacity.

The United Kingdom undertakes not to withdraw those forces against the wishes of the majority of the Brussels Treaty Powers, who should take their decision in the knowledge of SACEUR’s views. This undertaking would be subject to the understanding that an acute overseas emergency might oblige Her Majesty’s Government to omit this procedure. If the maintenance of United Kingdom forces on the mainland of Europe throws at any time too heavy a strain on the external finances of the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom will invite the North Atlantic Council to review the financial conditions on which the formations are maintained.

My colleagues will realise that what I have announced is for us a very formidable step to take. You all know that ours is above all an island story. We are still an island people in thought and tradition, whatever the modern facts of weapons and strategy may compel. And it has been not without considerable reflection that the Government which I represent here has decided that this statement could be made to you this afternoon. I want only to add this: we are making it in just the same spirit as Mr. Dulles spoke just now, because we hope that by doing so we shall make a contribution to enable this conference to succeed, and recreate confidence on this European Continent and make it possible for us to show an example of unity to the world. Of course, you will understand that what we have just said, and the undertaking we are prepared to give, does depend on the outcome of our work. If we succeed here then this undertaking stands; if we do not, Her Majesty’s Government could not regard itself as committed to what I have said this afternoon. That applies to the whole of our work, all the work that we are doing here. So I can only conclude by saying I hope the conference will consider that what we have said will be a contribution to bring us at least a stage nearer the successful conclusion of our labours.

Annex II C

Statement by the Canadian Minister for External Affairs (The Hon. Lester Pearson) at the Plenary Meeting

Mr. Chairman, this item on the agenda, which I apologise for returning to, item 5, is headed “United Kingdom and United States Declarations”. I assume that under it I would be quite in order in expressing great appreciation for the statements which have been made by you and by Mr. Dulles this afternoon, and I hope I would not be ruled out of order if I make a short declaration on behalf of my own country.

Your statement, Mr. Chairman, if I may say so, was one of historic importance. If it is thought, as it sometimes is, that the United Kingdom looks across the Channel more intensely in war than in peacetime, that feeling certainly must have been removed by your statement earlier this afternoon. To me it was all the more impressive because I recognise that the source of the power and the glory of this island has been its vision across the seas.

The statement of Mr. Dulles was also important, not only for the development of European unity, but for that larger Atlantic Community development with which we are all concerned. Indeed, as I see it, European unity cannot be effectively secured unless the lines not only across the Channel but across the Atlantic are strong and unbroken. My country has a part to play in this Atlantic aspect of the problem. Therefore, we accept the continuing obligations arising out of our membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, and we are resolved to continue to do our best to discharge them. The disappearance of E.D.C. does not, we think, affect those obligations, because E.D.C.—though we were indeed disappointed in its disappearance—because E.D.C., as we saw it, was a means to an end and not an end in itself. We are here to find an alternative method to accomplish the same purpose. That alternative method, that alternative arrangement, must include the association of Germany not only with the defence of Europe and the West, but—and this is, I am sure, equally important— with the development of the Atlantic Community; an association to be brought about in such a way that the fears that we have inherited from the unhappy past will be replaced by a new and better hope for the future.

So new methods are being discussed this week and new solutions are being sought. As far as we are concerned, however, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation remains the focal point of our participation in collective defence and of our hope for the development of closer cooperation with the other peoples of the Atlantic community. As such, it remains a foundation of Canadian foreign policy. Indeed, enduring and whole-hearted support for N.A.T.O. is for us a policy above politics on which I think our friends can rely.

That support in defence matters is now worked out each year by consultation through the appropriate agencies of our organisation— that is, N.A.T.O. Apart from mutual aid, it now takes the form of naval forces, an infantry brigade group, and an air division of twelve jet fighter squadrons stationed in Europe. We will continue to assist in the common defence through the existing N.A.T.O. procedures until better ones are agreed on. The presence of these Canadian forces on the European continent is not only a measure of our military contribution to the common defence, but an evidence of our belief in the future of the North Atlantic Community.

While we emphasise, then, our belief in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, we welcome the proposed extension of the Brussels Treaty. We shall look forward to a growing relationship within the framework of N.A.T.O. to the Brussels Treaty countries with whom we are bound by such close ties.

We are sure, and I hope our confidence will be realised—I know it will—that these new arrangements through Brussels can be developed without weakening or diminishing N.A.T.O. in any way in its essential functions, because N.A.T.O., with Germany associated with it under agreed arrangements, should, we think, be a stronger force than ever against war, and for the progressive development of the Atlantic Community.

We are also certain, Mr. Chairman, that in this development the United States, which has played such a magnificent, generous and indeed essential part, will continue to be able to do so. Mr. Dulles has given us hope in that regard this afternoon.

We Canadians, being neighbours of the United States, know as well as anybody else, that that country does not fail to accept and to meet, successfully, any great international challenge which faces it. We are certain that in the days ahead it will continue to meet the challenge of assisting in the development of European unity and the Atlantic Community—and the two go together.

The work, then, which we are doing this week must, in order to succeed, make possible the continued contribution of the United States to these great objectives. If that is done, and I know it is going to be done, it will also, I assure you, make it much easier for my own country to continue to do its share.

Annex III

Conference Paper on “A German Defence Contribution and Arrangements to Apply to Saceur’s Forces on the Continent”

The nine Governments represented at the London Conference agree to instruct representatives to draw up in Paris, in concert with the military and civilian agencies of N.A.T.O. through the Secretary General, detailed proposals, for approval by the North Atlantic Council, for a German defence contribution and arrangements to be applied to SACEUR’s forces on the Continent. These detailed proposals shall be based on the following principles agreed between the nine Governments:—

1. —(a) The seven Brussels Treaty Powers will conclude a special agreement setting out the forces each of them will place under SACEUR on the Continent.

(b) The German contribution shall conform in size and general characteristics to the contribution fixed for the E.D.C. brought up to date and adapted as necessary to make it suitable for N.A.T.O.

(c) The terms of this special agreement will be agreed with the other N.A.T.O. countries.

(d) If at any time the N.A.T.O. Annual Review recommends an increase above the figures in the Brussels Special Agreement such increase will require the unanimous approval of the Brussels powers expressed in the Brussels Council or in N.A.T.O.

(e) The Brussels Powers will ask that arrangements be made for SACEUR to designate a high-ranking officer who will be instructed to transmit regularly to the Brussels Treaty Organisation information acquired as indicated in 3(f) below in order to permit that Organisation to establish that the figures agreed among the Brussels Powers are being observed.

2. All forces of N.A.T.O. countries stationed on the Continent of Europe shall be placed under the authority of SACEUR, with the exception of the forces which N.A.T.O. has recognised or will recognise as suitable to remain under national command. The strength and armaments on the Continent of the internal defence forces and of the police belonging to the members of the Brussels Treaty Organisation shall be fixed by agreements made within this Organisation, taking into account the task for which they are intended and on the basis of existing levels and needs.

3. Arrangements to apply to SACEUR’s forces

(a) Forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent shall be deployed in accordance with N.A.T.O. strategy.

(b) The location of such forces shall be determined by SACEUR after consultation and agreement with the national authorities concerned.

(c) Such forces shall not be redeployed on the Continent nor used operationally on the Continent without his consent subject to appropriate political guidance from the North Atlantic Council.

(d) Forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent shall be integrated as far as possible consistent with military efficiency.

(e) Arrangements shall be made for the closer co-ordination of logistics by SACEUR.

(f) The level and effectiveness of forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent and the armaments, equipment, logistics and reserve formations of those forces on the Continent shall be inspected by SACEUR.

1. The source text is a certified copy of the Final Act which was transmitted to the Department of State in despatch 1933 from London, Jan. 7, 1955. The French and German texts have been omitted.

   The Final Act, which was approved at the 14th Plenary meeting of the Nine-Power Conference, was circulated at the Conference as document NPC (54) 59. Earlier drafts of the Final Act are in the Conference files, lot 60 D 627, CF 365.

2. These agreements and documents will be specified in the final text. [Brackets and footnote in the source text.]
2. Omission in source text.
2. Omission in source text.
3. These agreements and documents will be specified in the final text. [Brackets and footnote in the source text.]