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

740.5/9–2054: Telegram

The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Aldrich) to the Department of State ¹

secret

London, September 20, 1954—5 p.m.

1423. British views on safeguards to accompany German entry into NATO and Brussels pact briefly outlined as follows:

1. General principles. All military arrangements should be in NATO. Even if Brussels powers agree on certain military controls which will apply only to them, these controls should be implemented through NATO so that there will be no duplication of military organization.

2. Safeguards should not be in negative form as French appear to suggest but should be positive operating arrangements which can make useful contribution to common military task.

3. Safeguards should not interfere with military effectiveness of NATO.

Application of above principles to French memorandum² contain Mendes-France proposals raise questions regarding principle No. 5 in which French speak of important military arrangements to accompany modified Brussels pact text. British feel strongly these military arrangements should be under NATO.

As regards French proposal on controls and inspections, British believe matter can best be handled by formalizing and extending SACEUR’s present inspection system of NATO forces.

Regarding armament zones and distinction between categories (as set forth in Annex 2 of Article 107 of Treaty of Paris) British still believe NATO is better framework than Brussels treaty but they are willing to negotiate this point.

British do not feel they can now state a position until they know what zones French propose in which arms manufacture would be limited. The British agree with the general principle.

Main British question regarding French plan is on proposal to distribute orders for manufacturing armaments on continent of Europe. British are skeptical on grounds of (1) practicability (2) excessively negative approach (3) doubt that it will be feasible unless undesirable supranational element reintroduced (4) belief that production planning at least could be done best on NATO basis even though executive function might have to be carried out under Brussels pact machinery.

On all of these points, however, British are willing to consider French ideas and will go as far as they can to meet them.

British are enthusiastic over General Gruenther’s comments in telegram 1332 [332] September 19.³

Aldrich

1. Repeated to Bonn and to Paris, with instructions to pass to Hughes and Reinhardt.
2. Presumably a reference to the French aide-mémoire whose text was transmitted in circular telegram 148 of Sept. 20, infra.
3. Same as telegram 1175 from Paris, Sept. 19, supra.