428. Telegram From the Department of State to Embassy in Germany0
1933. Brussels and Luxembourg pass USEC, Paris pass USRO. As January 12 and 13 meeting Joint US-Canada Cabinet Committee1 largely concerned Common Market implications may be some speculation on what decisions if any reached. May be some effort to see in Communiqué and news stories change basic U.S. policies.
Purpose regular annual meeting was to exchange views on two important interrelated subjects: (1) prospective U.K. adherence Common Market and (2) new U.S. trade program. In view sensitivity of Canadians and their current sense of frustration we felt U.S.-Canadian relations required ministerial confrontation.[Page 1165]
Meeting itself held in friendly atmosphere. Canadian Ministers obviously preoccupied in jockeying for domestic political position in anticipation early Canadian elections. General Canadian position still basically reserved to hostile about U.K. adherence Common Market although position more moderate than previously; suspicions about European integration in general mixed with worry about possible adverse impact Canadian exports; emphasis on value Commonwealth system and essentiality preferences to its preservation. While Canadians expressed keen interest in outline of President’s trade program, unprepared state public support of it arguing to so so would amount interference U.S. governmental processes.
As Communiqué’s principal impact in Canada, U.S. Delegation did not press for statement which fully expressed U.S. views. Nor did U.S. Delegation want to highlight our differences with them in Communiqué. We did not insist, for instance, on reiterating in Communiqué U.S. support European integration movement and virtues we see U.K. adherence. Nor did we insist on restatement long-term U.S. opposition to preferences and particularly to extension Commonwealth preferences into Common Market. Canadians nonetheless made clearly aware during meetings U.S. views. Canadians, however, did press their hope U.S. would refrain from public utterances against preferences while U.K. negotiated with Six as a means of improving U.K. negotiating position. U.S. said could give no commitment to Canadians on this point.
Should questions be raised about whether U.S. positions have shifted, particularly on basic value to free world of Common Market or more tolerant U.S. view re preferences, missions may draw on foregoing while adhering to established policy lines.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.42/1–1562. Confidential. Drafted and approved by Schaetzel and cleared with Burdett, E, and the Department of the Treasury. Also sent to Brussels, London, Luxembourg, and Paris, and repeated to Ottawa, Bern, Canberra, The Hague, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna, and Wellington.↩
- The U.S. record of this meeting and briefing papers for it are ibid., Conference Files: Lot 65 D 533, CF 2028. For text of the communiqué issued at the end of the meeting, see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1962, pp. 531–532.↩