232. Telegram From the Delegation at the Geneva Conference to the Department of State1
Secto 66. Foreign Ministers at 11:00 meeting engaged in long procedural wrangle over directives to be addressed by Heads of Government to subsequent Foreign Ministers conference.
Molotov tabled following draft which he claimed took account previously expressed view of delegates:
“The Heads of Government of the USSR, the USA, France and the United Kingdom, guided by the desire to contribute to the relaxation of international tension and consolidation of confidence between states, direct the Foreign Ministers to continue the consideration of the following questions, on which views have been exchanged at the Geneva conference.
- “1. European security. For the purpose of establishing a system of European security, which should be sought through effective means with due regard to the legitimate interests of all states and taking into account their inalienable right individual and collective self-defence, the Ministers are directed to consider proposals on the conclusion of a security treaty for Europe or first, for part of Europe, as well as other possible proposals pertaining to the solution of this [Page 469] problem. Moreover, they shall also consider proposals relating to: The elimination, control and inspection of armed forces and armaments; the establishment, between East and West, of a zone where armed forces will be stationed by mutual consent; and, the assumption by states of an obligation not to resort to force and to deny assistance to an aggressor.
- “2. Disarmament. The Ministers shall examine proposals submitted at the Geneva conference on the reduction of armaments and prohibition of atomic weapons, being guided by the necessity to prepare for the United Nations agreed recommendations that would provide for the establishment of definite levels of armaments and armed forces of states and the prohibition of atomic and hydrogen weapons, with the institution of effective international agreement. Success in this field would mean that vast material resources would be set free for the peaceful economic development of nations, improvement of their welfare, as well as assistance to under developed countries.
“3. German question. The Heads of Government have agreed that the solution of the German question and the reunification of Germany by means of free elections should be carried out in conformity with the national interests of the German people and in the interest of European security.
“The Ministers shall consider this problem with the participation of representatives of the German Democratic Republic and the German Federal Republic.
- “4. The Foreign Ministers of the four powers will meet at (blank), shall continue the consideration of these questions and will determine the organization of their work”.2
Long discussion ensued from which following points emerged. Secretary recalled Heads of Government had requested directive on German reunification and European security and draft recommendation to UN Sub-commission on Disarmament. These matters should be dealt with in order established by Heads of Government discussion. Pinay and Macmillan agreed, latter stressing Heads of Government had discussed German reunification first. Molotov claimed all three subjects important and none should be relegated, claiming special attention be devoted European security and disarmament and then German reunification. He suggested Foreign Ministers draft separate directives all three subjects leaving Heads of Government to determine order.
Meeting recessed at Secretary’s suggestion and Western tripartite working groups drew up (1) draft directive on German reunification and European security and (2) draft recommendation to UN Sub-commission on Disarmament. Documents presented at resumption meeting noon follow: [Page 470]
“Draft Directive (July 22) to the Foreign Ministers Proposed by the Delegates of France, the UK and the USA.
“The Heads of Government of France, the UK, the USSR, and the USA, guided by the desire to contribute to the relaxation of international tension and to the consolidation of confidence between states, instruct their Foreign Ministers to continue the consideration of the following questions with regard to which an exchange of views has taken place at the Geneva conference, and to propose effective means for their solution.
- “1. Germany. The Heads of Govt, recognizing their common responsibility for the reunification of Germany, have agreed that the reunification of Germany by means of free elections shall be carried out in conformity with the national interests of the German people and the interests of European security.
- “2. European Security. For the purpose of establishing European security with due regard to the legitimate interests of all nations and which would take into account their inherent right to individual and collective self-defense, the Ministers are instructed to consider various proposals to this end, including the following: A security pact for Europe or for a part of Europe including provision for the assumption by member nations of an obligation not to resort to force and to deny assistance to an aggressor; limitation control and inspection in regard to armed forces and armament; establishment between East and West of a zone in which the disposition of armed forces will be subject to mutual consent; and also to consider other possible proposals pertaining to the solution of this problem.
“The Foreign Ministers of the four powers will meet at (blank) during October to initiate their consideration of these questions and to determine the organization of their work.”3
“The four Heads of Government;
“Desirous of removing the threat of war and lessening the burden of armaments.
“Convinced of the necessity, for secure peace and for the welfare of mankind of achieving a system for the control and reduction of armaments and armed forces under effective safeguards.
“Recognizing that achievements in this field would release vast material resources to be devoted to the peaceful economic development of nations, for raising their well-being, as well as for assistance to under developed countries.
“Agree: [Page 471]
- “(1) for these purposes to work together to develop an acceptable system for disarmament through the sub-committee of the United Nations Disarmament Commission;
- “(2) to instruct their representatives in the
Sub-committee in the discharge of their mandate from
the United Nations;
- “(a) to take into account in their work of the views and proposals advanced by the Heads of Government at this conference;
- “(b) to request the Sub-committee to give priority in its work to the study of the methods of instituting effective international control, including inspection, reporting, and publicity; and
- “(c) to propose that the next meeting of the Sub-committee be held on August 29, 1955, at New York”.4
Secretary explained new drafts had taken account views and proposals all four delegations. Molotov declined to consider since had not yet received Soviet text. He suggested meeting meantime discuss Soviet draft directive presented yesterday laying down principles in connection with establishment European collective security system (Secto 635). Secretary suggested Soviet document of type to be referred by Heads of Government to Foreign Ministers meeting in October. Pinay and Macmillan agreed, pointing out need consult any other interested European government. Molotov agreed on condition Soviet proposal be discussed by October conference. Secretary and Macmillan said should be considered with other proposals.
Foreign Ministers resume at 3:00 before Heads of Government meeting.6
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 396.1–GE/7–2255. Secret; Priority. Repeated to London, Paris, Moscow, and Bonn. The U.S. Delegation verbatim record, USDEL/Verb/M–4, July 22, which indicates that the session began at 10:15 a.m., and the record of decisions, CF/DOC/RD/9, July 23, are ibid., Conference Files: Lot 63 D 123, CF 509.↩
- This draft was circulated as CF/DOC/17, July 22, in the records of the conference.↩
- This draft directive was circulated as CF/DOC/22, July 22, in the records of the conference.↩
- This proposal was circulated as CF/DOC/18, July 22, in the records of the conference.↩
- Document 221.↩
- Regarding this meeting, see Document 235.↩