396.1 LO/1–2452: Telegram

No. 792
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in France1


4440. Fol are Dept’s views on Aust Treaty situation (London’s 3224 Jan 242):

Present Status

(1) Agree West Deputies cannot meet on Sov terms without admitting relevance extraneous issues.

(2) Sov 1trs and absence from mtg have created situation anticipated Eden conversations Jan 10 (Deptel 3292 Jan 11 to London3). Opportunity now exists for transition from draft to abbreviated treaty. Dept apprehensive lest this opportunity be lost by continuing Brit and Fr procrastination on whole new concept and details to effect presentation to Sovs. Believe wld be mistake for West to wait indefinitely for Sovs to act as to do so, without action on our part, wld afford opportunity for change in public opinion both in West and Aust tending toward belief Sov position has some validity and West not doing utmost to protect Aust interests.

Interim Action

(3) As further means to indicate field has been cleared for introduction new tactics Dept proposes tripartite group Vienna prepare communiqué for issuance by West Treaty Deps recommending Govts consider means to reestablish four power negots in view Sov obstructionism on present basis. Communiqué shld be released immed after receipt Sov reply to West Deps Jan 19 1tr4 if substance substantially as predicted para 1 London’s 3224 or at latest prior Lisbon mtg FonMins.5

Planning and Preparation Introduction Abbreviated Treaty

(4) Recommend tripartite work on abbrev treaty proceed urgently with view submission specific program to FonMins at Lisbon for resolution remaining differences if any. Believe tripartite group Vienna cld achieve substantial agreement on abbreviated text, manner in which matters not included in abbreviated text are to [Page 1737]be treated, and White Paper thus leaving to FonMins consideration project as a whole.

(5) Re inclusion mil clauses and prohibition Anschluss in text believe Treaty shld be limited to barest essentials and that conditions giving rise to Fr apprehensions have diminished. Vienna and Paris shld attempt persuade Fr that Sovs, if they are at all willing discuss abbrev treaty, may be expected demand inclusion these provisions among others. Preferable, therefore, to have Sovs raise these matters which cld then be used by West for bargaining purposes. If Fr do not agree they might be told best place for guarantee against Anschluss wld be in Ger Peace Treaty.

Bilateral Agmts

(6) (Vienna’s 2430 Jan 246 and London’s 3133 Jan 18.7 Dept realizes ultimate need for some such agmts but in view uncertainty surrounding abbreviated text believes specific commitments at this time not approp. Sovs cld scare heavily if info leaked that West was seeking retain advantages of draft treaty while proposing elimination of arts favorable to Sovs. Dept strongly prefers asking Austs for gen undertaking to give certain commitments which will be determined in future but which will in no case exceed those presently contained in agreed arts or in West versions unagreed arts draft treaty, or in commitments we have already requested. Agree, however, appropriateness study by tripartite group Vienna of specific commitments and best method obtaining them. Suggest this connection that waiver claims, DP question and Yugo relations (arts 7 bis and 45) receive attention in addition to other arts previously discussed. Agree with Brit that all such matters need not be covered in bilaterals as some cld more appropriately be taken care of by Aust legis or other means.

White Paper

(7) Dept concurs modifications suggested by Brit (Vienna’s despatch 1057 Jan 158) and recommends tripartite group Vienna give urgent attn completion White Paper. Entire paper shld be brought up to date to reflect current situation, including justification for [Page 1738]transition to abbreviated text as outlined Dept’s paper “Aust Treaty—Proposal for Positive Action by US”.9

(8) Concur proposal HICOMs Vienna consider means alleviating Aust situation caused by continued failure conclude final settlement. Study and any resulting recommendations shld not however be considered in any manner as substitute for proposed treaty and work thereon shld not be permitted to delay in any way required prompt action in connection abbreviated text program. Study might give consideration to possibility seeking quadripartite agmt under arts 8a and 14 of Control agmt and shld also include those phases of occ controls and privileges in which West action cld be taken without Sov participation and without endangering existing quadripartite machinery and West interests.

(9) London, Paris, Vienna requested to urge Brit and Fr to agree foregoing program including earliest designation reps tripartite group Vienna. Views Aust Govt shld be obtained by West HICOMs prior submitting report and recommendations.

  1. Drafted by E.P. Allen, Rutter, and Land; cleared by Dawson, Byington, Bonbright, and Perkins. Repeated for action to London, Vienna, and Bonn and for information to Moscow.
  2. Document 790.
  3. See Document 782.
  4. Regarding the Jan. 19 letter and the Soviet reply, see Document 780.
  5. The Foreign Ministers met in Lisbon, Feb. 20–26, 1952.
  6. Telegram 2430 reported on meetings with the British concerning the possible need for extra-treaty commitments from the Austrian Government if the Soviets appeared willing to accept the abbreviated treaty. (396.1 LO/1–2452)
  7. Telegram 3133 contained the draft text of a note proposed by the Foreign Office for issuance by the Austrian Government to the Western powers assuring favorable treatment on certain issues not covered by articles in the abbreviated treaty. (663.001/1–1852)
  8. Despatch 1057 transmitted to the Department of State an aide-mémoire from the British Embassy in Vienna proposing drafting changes in the paper “The United States and the Austrian Treaty” which was intended to serve as a basis for a White Paper. (663.001/1–1552)
  9. Regarding this paper, see Document 782.