Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Germany and Austria, Volume VII, Part 2

762.022/5–2654: Telegram

No. 692
The Ambassador in France (Dillon) to the Department of State¹

secret
priority

Paris, May 26, 1954—8 p.m.

4554. From Dillon and Bruce. Re Deptel 4245.² Foll are our joint views on Conant’s recommendations (Bonn’s 3661 to Dept³) in light latest developments:

1. We agree with Conant’s views that U.S. Govt shld support Chancellor’s efforts to prevent any reopening of French-German negots on Saar. We also agree that discussions on how best to obtain final approval of Saar agreement shld be handled by Adenauer directly with either Laniel, Bidault or Teitgen, using if desirable, continued help of mediation by Spaak and van der Naters.

2. Teitgen undertook in Strasbourg to put agreement thru French Cabinet without change. So far as we know, he is holding to this undertaking and may be unaware of changes proposed by Sauvagnargues and intentions of Quai d’Orsay to submit proposals for additl changes. Saar question was raised at French Cabinet mtg today and Teitgen had discussion and action postponed for one week in return for pledge to discuss matter thoroughly in Cabinet mtg next week.

3. So long as Teitgen continues to believe he can fulfill his undertaking we shld continue to follow Spaak’s suggestion (Coled 259⁴) and treat question of obtaining French approval of Teitgen’s ad referendum agreement as a French internal question. Ophuels on instructions of Chancellor is trying to see Teitgen today or tomorrow with regard to Sauvagnargues’ démarche. We suggest waiting until Teitgen’s views have been ascertained before making a decision on character and timing of U.S. representations if such shld appear necessary.⁵

Dillon

1. Repeated to London and Bonn.
2. Telegram 4245 stated that the developments reported in telegram 3661 (supra) were extremely disturbing and asked for Dillon’s and Bruce’s comments. (762.022/5–2554)
3. Supra.
4. Not printed. (762.022/5–2454)
5. On May 27 the Embassy in Paris reported that the text of the Strasbourg agreement had been published in Le Monde and that since the French Government had consistently denied that there was an agreement, it would now be considerably more difficult to get Cabinet approval without changes. (Telegram 4564, 762.022/5–2754) On the following day Bruce reported that Ophuels had talked with Teitgen who had proposed a whole new set of changes in the agreement, changes that were different from those presented previously by the French. (Coled 261 from Paris, 762.022/5–2854)