Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume IX, International Development and Economic Defense Policy; Commodities

357. Telegram From the Mission to the European Communities to the Department of State¹

Brussels, November 29, 1967, 1715Z.

3211. Pass Agriculture and STR. Subject: Turkey Parts.

1. Malmgren, Katz, Renner, and Albrecht talked with Schlosser and Klein on November 28.

2. We again emphasized that the supplementary levies on turkey parts threatened our trade. It was our impression that the new supplementary levies had been set at a level much higher than necessary to achieve the purpose of the poultry regulations and that extra protection not envisaged in the regulations was included. We urged the Commission to look and look quickly at the figures to see whether the supplementary levies could not be reduced. We stressed that unless corrective steps were taken within a few days irreparable damage would be done to our holiday trade.²

3. Schlosser confirmed Deniau’s willingness to re-examine the figures but did not hold out much hope that the Community would act. He said that many Europeans felt that, as a result of US retaliation at the end of the chicken war, the Community was legally free to act as it wished. Schlosser said that the political atmosphere favoring a pragmatic solution might be improved if the US were to make a gesture by rolling back some of its previous retaliation or some other such action. Schlosser made it clear that this was not an offer, but he did want us to think about the point.

4. We protested, asserting that the onus was on the side that disturbed the status quo not on the side that was injured. We claimed that our earlier retaliation was in response to damage done to our chicken exports. What we are now considering is new protection against our exports of turkey parts, a large part of which had been developed after the chicken war.³

5. We finished this dispute by agreeing that it would not be profitable to approach this problem in terms of GATT legalisms. Rather we should both seek a pragmatic solution, bearing in mind political realities on both sides.

6. Schlosser said he would be in touch with us soon. We reiterated the need for speed.

Schaetzel

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, INCO–POULTRY 17 EEC. Limited Official Use. Repeated to Bonn, The Hague, Luxembourg for USEC, Paris for USOECD, Rome, and Geneva for GATT.
2. Telegram 71345 to Bonn and other missions in Europe, November 18, stressed among other things: “Timing is critical for US poultry industry, especially turkey producers, since industry will be obliged within next few days to make commitments for peak holiday season.” (Ibid., INCO–POULTRY EEC)
3. Documentation on an earlier “chicken war” is in Foreign Relations, 1961–1963, volume IX.