Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Western Europe and Canada, Volume VI, Part 1

840.20/5–2551: Telegram

No. 235
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in France ¹

confidential

Washington , May 25, 1951—10 p.m.

6392. Fol is revised agreed position US Govt re agri pool which shld guide US officials. Finally approved paper with background discussion being airmailed today.²

1. In dealing with this proposal, US Reps shld have in mind fact that relative inefficiency of many branches of Eur agriculture have proven major stumbling block to raising Eur’s living standards and that national policies for protecting agriculture are impeding further progress toward economic integration in Western Europe. Accordingly, US Reps in dealing with this problem shld encourage Eur countries to continue their efforts develop constructive solution for these problems, including (a) improving marketing and production techniques, (b) providing some degree of security for agricultural producers, (c) reducing or eliminating national barriers to movement and sale of agricultural products.

2. US position is that plan along lines so far proposed by French,³ although assertedly proposed to meet problems set out in para 1 above, would not be effective or desirable means of achieving these objectives. Based on summary and analysis below, it appears that substantive provisions of both Council of Europe proposal⁴ and French technical memorandum⁵ in their present form wld result in clear disadvantages for nonpool members and no real assurances of net advantages for pool countries as a whole in first three stages of plan, during which principal effect of plan wld be to increase degree of protection for member countries and to raise prices in pool market. In fact, there is real possibility of net disadvantage for pool countries as group in first three stages. Furthermore, there is no firm commitment for merger of European national markets (fourth stage), which is to be achieved only at some indefinite future data. In general, plan seems to be concerned principally with organization of European markets to avoid surpluses and, at least initially, to avoid competitive marketing. It is US view that one of the basic problems of European agriculture is improvement of production and marketing techniques and that any proposal shld devote more attention to this problem.

3. While present French plans as embodied in Council of Europe paper and technical memorandum are not satisfactory, constructive cooperation among European nations in field of agriculture wld appear feasible and desirable and shld be encouraged. At this stage, US shld not urge resort by Europeans to any specific channel. However, attention of Europeans may be called to possibility that Food and Agriculture Organization and Food and Agriculture Committee of OEEC could be of special assistance in analyzing European agricultural problems and in developing constructive proposals in line with objectives suggested in para 1 above. Prospect for successful meeting wld be enhanced if experience of these two groups could be utilized. It wld appear desirable, therefore, to arrange conference at time which wld permit delegates to have before them advice of these bodies.

4. Position set out above shld be communicated informally to appropriate French officials in response to their previous request for US reaction to their plan, and to officials of any other govt in any approach on subject. General tenor of US comments to French and other foreign officials shld be such as wld contribute to achievement of constructive solution of European agricultural problems.

Acheson

1. Drafted by Vernon, cleared with Boochever and Margolies, and repeated for action to London, Rome, The Hague, Frankfurt, Geneva (USDel ECE), Brussels, and for information to Ottawa.
2. A copy of the paper under reference, which was a response to the French agricultural pool proposal (see footnote 3 below), is in Bruce Mission files, lot 57 M 38, “Agricultural Pool”.
3. The French proposals concerning an agricultural pool were outlined in a “Memorandum on the Organization and Unification of the Principal Agricultural Markets in the European Plan,” which was given to Embassy officials on a confidential basis and transmitted to the Department of State in Despatch 2260 from Paris, Feb. 13, 1951. (850.20/2–1351)
4. Presumably a reference to the Report of the Special Committee for Agriculture of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe, entitled “European Authority for Agriculture,” May 5, 1951; a copy of this report is in Bruce Mission files, lot 57 M 38, “Agricultural Pool”.
5. See footnote 3 above.