Office of the Historian

347. Memorandum of Conversation0

US/MC/68
Geneva, June 1, 1959, 10:30 a.m.

MEETING OF FOREIGN MINISTERS PALAIS DES NATIONS, GENEVA, 1959

PARTICIPANTS

  • United States
    • Mr. Merchant
    • Mr. Reinhardt
    • Mr. Berding
    • Mr. Irwin
    • Mr. Becker
    • Mr. Hillenbrand
  • France
    • Mr. Lucet
    • Mr. Laloy
    • Mr. Baraduc
    • Mr. Froment-Meurice
    • Mr. Soutou
    • Mr. Legendre
    • Mr. de Beaumarchais
    • Ambassador De Jean
  • United Kingdom
    • Sir Anthony Rumbold
    • Sir Gladwyn Jebb
    • Mr. Hancock
    • Mr. Drinkall
    • Mr. Ledwidge
    • Mr. Hope
    • Mr. Wilkinson
  • Federal Republic
    • Ambassador Grewe
    • Mr. Duckwitz
    • Mr. Oncken

SUBJECT

  • Tentative Conclusions on Tactical and Other Conference Problems

The following recommendations were reached by the Four Power Coordinating Group:

1.
The three participating Western Foreign Ministers in private talks with Gromyko will rotate the task of getting in touch with Von [Page 802] Brentano or Grewe to keep the West German Delegation informed. In view of the French-British dinner tonight, the United States will undertake the task today.
2.
At this afternoon’s private meeting the Western Powers will attempt to avoid having the discussion revolve further around the question of why the Soviets desire to change the basic status of West Berlin but instead concentrate on presentation of mutual complaints about “undesirable activities” in East and West Berlin. The Western Foreign Ministers should have in mind the desirability of avoiding seeming to admit guilt on our part as a trading point against some arrangements on access.
3.
Since the Western correspondents are tending to pick up the Soviet phrase “Free City” as a description for the Soviet proposals on Berlin, Western spokesmen should avoid adding fuel to this tendency to use a term with rather inviting connotations. One possibility suggested was “Plan for a Third Germany”.
4.
After some discussion, it was agreed that it would be undesirable to raise the question of Western complaints on access this afternoon. An effort should be made instead to concentrate on complaints about the situation in Berlin itself.
5.
If it seems appropriate in the light of the discussion this afternoon, the question of a Conciliation Commission for Berlin might be raised. However, if this is done, the initial suggestion should be limited to one for a Commission to be constituted solely by the Four Powers.
6.
It was agreed that it would probably be desirable to have a further plenary session by the middle of this week, but it was felt that the timing could be best determined after this afternoon’s discussion. At such plenary session, Ambassador Grewe would give a speech which he has prepared commenting on a number of points raised during the first weeks of the Conference.
7.
In a statement which he said he wished to make in order to bring U.S. views to the attention of the other country representatives present, Mr. Merchant pointed out that we considered RIAS to be a major Western asset in Berlin. Since the time of the blockade, it had been identified in a unique way with free world resistance to Soviet attempts to end the city’s freedom, and its demise would have great symbolic significance. Hence we did not consider RIAS a barterable object. Grewe supported these views.

  1. Source: Department of State, Conference Files: Lot 64 D 560, CF 1339. Secret. Drafted by Hillenbrand and concurred in by Merchant. The meeting was held in the French Delegation Office.↩