Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Western European Integration and Security, Canada, Volume VII, Part 1

119. Despatch From the Mission at the European Communities to the Department of State⁰

Ecbus D–37

Brussels, July 27, 1960.

REF

• Ecbus D–11, July 8 and Ecbus D–29, July 20¹

SUBJECT

• Progress Toward European Integration

Summary.

European officials, vacation bound in late July, left behind them a work-year of real progress toward eventual economic unification. They had begun to speed up nearly every aspect of economic activity, including the common agricultural policy on which the Council of Ministers had adopted a specific timetable for future progress. Their special achievements in the commercial policy field were crucial to progress toward economic union, since they reaffirmed the political determination of the Member States to establish once and for all the inviolability and the reality of the Common Market.

From the Common Market’s beginnings, the challenge to its aspiration for individual identity has been manifested largely in commercial policy and trade terms, although based on a variety of political and economic considerations. When the Council of Ministers reaffirmed in May 1960² its dedication to a common external tariff, by accelerating its implementation and lowering its incidence, coupled with a faster pace in lowering internal duties, it responded effectively to this challenge as it had been posed. As a result, third countries began to accept the Common Market as an enduring reality. Thus, this institutional approach to European economic integration should be irreversible when the first move toward the common external tariff takes place at the end of 1960. And if the Common Market’s current high rate of economic growth continues, it could make the market a magnet rather than a target for its European trading partners.

Hardly had the ink dried on the Council’s May decision when European Community officials began speaking privately of a new political initiative to give further impetus to the European movement. And in the succeeding weeks, pronouncements by European statesmen (particularly General De Gaulle, Debré and Couve de Murville) brought the qualifications of European institutions under scrutiny. Consequently, it appeared likely that the new work-year would open in September with discussions of ways to improve and consolidate the Community’s institutions, accompanied by some significant internal political initiatives.

Community Institutions—Political Consultations.

EEC Commission, Member State Permanent Representation and Council Secretariat officials, of various national origins, gave Mission officials privately during June and July an evolving pattern of thinking on possible initiatives in the political field. Some Community officials said that it was necessary to take advantage of Chancellor Adenauer’s remaining time in office,³ and that the nature and form of political consultations would have to be resolved before decisions could be expected on such matters as direct elections of the European Parliament, the fusion of the three executives and the seat of the Communities. One Community source foresaw earlier this month the probability of an Adenauer–De Gaulle meeting in September or October, a meeting which has just been advanced to the day after tomorrow.⁴

EEC Commission Vice-President Marjolin has described privately the need to create and put into operation a political set-up for the Six which would partially parallel in the political field the economic organization established by the Rome Treaties. He felt that one could not wait for the natural evolution over the years from economic integration to political coordination. Marjolin said that the parallel political set-up which he was describing must be more formalized than the quarterly meetings of the Foreign Ministers of the Six which are now taking place.

At the same time, several high officials of the Council of Ministers Secretariat feared that the anticipated French political initiative might empty the existing Community institutions of their political content. However, they felt as did Marjolin that economic integration with all that it implied would continue to prosper, and that probably the intimations being received on French thinking permitted one to envisage an area of negotiation. These Council Secretariat officials hope at a minimum for a formal tie-in of political consultations with the present Council of Ministers Secretariat, insofar as the institutional aspect is concerned. Von Staden, Chef de Cabinet Designate of President Hallstein of the EEC Commission, has also spoken freely in private of the possibility of more rapid Community political growth outside of the existing terms of reference of the Rome Treaties but related to them.

Pressure has been building up for some time for constructive changes in the institutional field, apart from the question of political consultations or other political moves. The Monnet Committee, the two Commissions and the High Authority, and the European Parliamentary Assembly have spoken strongly in favor of the fusion of the three executives into a single European economic executive. And the Monnet Committee and the Parliament have pronounced themselves in favor of Parliamentary direct elections. The political content of the three Communities as inseparables had been re-stated, but the French raised a variety of doubts at the June Council of Ministers meeting by opposing at that time several “European” proposals of the Commissions.

Intra-Community negotiation of these questions will probably take some time, even following a possible Adenauer–De Gaulle understanding. There are basic differences between the French viewpoint and the viewpoint of the Benelux countries as to the manner in which the existing institutions, or possible political consultations, should be developed. Not only Adenauer but also a strong Italian government will be needed to assure that any procedures agreed upon are related as closely as possible to the Treaty principle of progressive transfer of certain powers to a central executive.

From a purely mechanical point of view, direct elections and fusion of the three executives could not conveniently take place before the end of 1961. The terms of office of the Common Market and Euratom Commissioners expire at the end of 1961, as do the terms of one-third of the members of the High Authority in September 1961, thus providing a convenient point of departure for fusion. The period of the gentlemen’s agreement to take no action on the permanent seat of the Communities also expires in early 1962, but this presumably is negotiable.

Commercial Policy.

Community officials are highly satisfied with the present situation and the outlook for handling European trade problems. United States guidance and support of the common external tariff acceleration-reduction proposal, and help in shifting trade questions from the European to a Free World framework, is recognized by all as having been a major factor in the Community’s achievement. Community officials sense that they have recaptured the initiative in the European trade field.

Inclusion of trade questions in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is not necessarily unwelcome in Community circles, and the Trade Committee of 21 is, of course, a reasonable facsimile of the Community’s originally proposed Contact Committee.⁵ Furthermore, the Community judges that the British and the others of the Outer Seven made it clear in Paris in June that they are not in a hurry on specific trade problems, and the possible operations of the OECD in the trade field are well in the future. Consequently, the focal point for discussion of near-term trade problems is likely to be that sought by the Community for a year and a half, i.e. GATT at Geneva.

Community officials are not unmindful of the importance of these upcoming negotiations to the future Free World trading pattern, and especially to the pressures which may subsequently prevail for a broader European trading arrangement. Commissioner Rey has recently stated privately to the Mission that he does not think that any responsible person in Europe is today seriously considering a European Free Trade Area, either for now or for the future. Vice-President Marjolin and others share this view. However, none of them is confident that European trade pressures can necessarily be fully avoided through multilateral negotiations.

Third Country Associations.

Greek association with the Common Market is still a major objective of Community officials, second only to the year-end move toward the common external tariff. Negotiations are continuing and could be completed at the outset of the new work-year. Aside from its importance per se, the terms of the Greek association are significant for the precedents they may set for Turkey and ultimately for countries such as Tunisia which might seek association with the Common Market.

Most key EEC Commissioners consider it premature to discuss the possible future association of industrial countries with the Common Market. However, their appreciation is that the economic and trade forces of the future are more likely to be centripetal than otherwise. In the closing months of this work-year, prior to Selwyn Lloyd’s firm statement in the Commons on July 25 against Britain joining the Common Market, most Community comment was on Great Britain rather than on the European Free Trade Area as a unit. If current Commission attitudes provide a true gauge for the future, British evaluations of the Common Market and its attractiveness, during and after the Dillon negotiations, will be those to watch. As of now, nothing less than full British membership would be acceptable, but in the world’s fluid situation no one would predict what the future might hold after those negotiations.

W. W. Butterworth

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 840.00/7–2760. Confidential. Drafted by Bergfield. Repeated to the OEEC capitals, USEC, USRO, and Paris for Thurston.
1. In despatch D–11 from Brussels, the Mission at the European Communities forwarded a translation of an article on the organization of the EEC by Pierre Drouin believed to reflect official French Governmental opinion. (ibid., 375.800/7–860) Despatch D–29 contained the texts of five motions approved by the Monnet Committee at its July 11 meeting on the merger of the community executives, direct elections of EEC representatives, cartel policies, EEC relations with the United Kingdom, and the problems of underdeveloped nations. (ibid., 375.800/7–2060)
2. May 13, in a special press release.
3. Adenauer announced his intention of retiring after leading his Christian Democratic Party through the 1961 parliamentary elections in Germany.
4. Adenauer and De Gaulle met at Rambouillet, France, July 29–30; see Document 120.
5. The “Contact Committee” was one of the proposals made by Hallstein in September 1959 to achieve closer cooperation between the EEC and other OEEC states in trade matters. The Committee of 21 included the EEC and the 20 OEEC states.