Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XIII, Western Europe Region

229. Telegram From Secretary of State Rusk to the Department of State¹

Paris, December 16, 1966.

9261. Secto 103. Personal for the President. The NATO meeting has gone well. We may have a minor Donnybrook over the communique later today because of French attitudes.² However, the work of the Fourteen has gone in a businesslike fashion with a maximum of solidarity and without static from the Danes and Canadians who have in the past been unwilling to accept the consequences of France’s withdrawal.

I gave the Council some “old-time religion” on Vietnam³ and believe that we can get some additional assistance from Germany, the Netherlands and some others but this must be developed bilaterally in capitals. I hit George Brown pretty hard on the point that they have the same treaty commitment that we have to “meet the common danger” in Vietnam. I intend to press them very hard for more participation but they will probably act like scared rabbits in the face of their domestic political situation.

One of the most important developments here has been Willy Brandt’s reaction to non-proliferation. The present German Government is ready to forget “hardware” and Brandt told me to forget the European clause. I am giving the latest Russian text of Article One to the NATO members of the Geneva Conference (UK, Canada and Italy) and will also show it privately to the Germans. Brandt made a major impression on NATO in demonstrating that the new German Government will not be bound by the rigid theology of the Adenauer period and is prepared to probe the possibilities of better relations with Eastern Europe, including the East Germans. This may not move us forward but twenty years of hostile confrontation has not done so and I believe that we should give them a chance to find out whether another approach might produce more results.

I was glad to hear from Bob McNamara that you wanted to get as many of our people and as much of our equipment out of France as possible prior to De Gaulle’s deadline. This seems to me to be the dignified attitude which we should take in the face of an outrageous decision taken without the slightest consultation with us.

I am trying to get details but the Norwegian Foreign Minister told me, with some astonishment, that recent public opinion polls in Norway showed that you were head and shoulders above any other world leader in the esteem of the Norwegian people. This does not astonish me but he obviously was surprised and pleased. I am also trying to get details of recent Japanese polls showing that the US is way out in front of countries most respected and admired by the Japanese people and that Peking has moved into first place among their dislikes, now surpassing the Russians.

Fanfani expressed to me personally his great appreciation to you for the strong support you gave in your October 8 [7] speech and otherwise to his initiative on the technological gap.

Rusk

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, NATO 3. Secret; Immediate; Nodis. The source text bears no time of transmission; the telegram was received at 10:30 a.m.
2. U.S. Delegation records of the NATO Ministerial Meeting at Paris December 14–16, including summaries of the meetings, briefing papers, telegrams to and from the delegation, and memoranda of conversation, are ibid., Conference Files: Lot 67 D 586, CF 109–119. For text of the final communique, see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1966, pp. 376–399.
3. Rusk’s report on the international situation, including Vietnam, was transmitted as an enclosure to CA–6368, December 17. (Department of State, Central Files, NATO 3 FR(PA))