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

210. Circular Telegram From the Delegation to the North Atlantic Council Ministerial Meeting to Certain Embassies⁰

April 4, 1959, 6:14 p.m.

1155. From U.S. Del NATO. NAC Ministerial session afternoon April 3¹ covered following subjects under Agenda Item I:

(1) procedures for further Four Power consultation with NAC on Berlin and Germany;²

(2) discussion of Middle East situation;

(3) Icelandic fisheries.

Session also covered Agenda Item II: Secretary-General’s report. Following is summary each subject:

[Here follows discussion of item (1); see volume VIII, Document 253, footnote 5.]

[9 paragraphs (3 pages of source text) not declassified]

4. US opened discussion Item II (Secretary General’s Annual Political Appraisal).³ (Acting Secretary’s statement reported in full in separate airgram repayed all addressee posts.)⁴

Member speakers then commented on report, each paying tribute to Sec Gen and his contribution to Alliance.

Netherlands stressed importance it attached to meeting Sino-Soviet economic offensive and expressed earnest hope there would be follow-up action in this field. Serious weaknesses in defense field very dangerous for Alliance. Recalled discussions of last Ministerial meeting⁵ and stated should be made possible for Secretary General to carry out tasks given him by providing staff.

Italy recalled importance increased military effort, noting four percent annual increase over five-year period in Italian defense spending. Officially informed NAC of US-Italian IRBM agreement⁶ and technical agreement with SACEUR, in implementation of Heads of Government decision December 1957.⁷ Stressed importance of maintaining security re details IRBM agreement and not informing press. Expressed willingness, however, inform NAC of details.

UK praised Sec Gen’s report as realistic document, with its stress on harmonization of policies rather than common policies. Spaak and NAC role in Cyprus settlement much appreciated. Increased emphasis on meeting Sino-Soviet economic offensive important, using trade, not aid, to underdeveloped areas and avoiding NATO label. On December Defense Resolution,⁸ hoped for good results, but process taking longer than desired.

Germany (Von Brentano) expressed importance practical approach political consultation. Should not be further institutionalized. Emphasis must be on developing habit consultation. Africa study⁹ good example; hoped apply this approach other areas.

Greece joined in tribute to Spaak for Cyprus role. Confident that Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities would be inspired by will to cooperate.

France (Couve de Murville) made brief statement expressing satisfaction with consultation process.

Turks also joined in expressing gratitude to Spaak and NAC re Cyprus and referred to joint Greek-Turkish memo on economic development.¹⁰

Norway stressed need not lose sight requirement for consultation within NATO of expansion economies of member states.

Spaak summarized as follows:

1. Political—Consultation generally in favorable state. Habit of consultation well established. Flexibility necessary.

2. Economic—Spaak emphasized great danger of Soviet economic offensive. NATO has important role to play in helping to develop an economic policy to meet this threat, although not necessary for NATO itself to carry out economic programs.

3. Defense—US-Italian IRBM agreement cause for satisfaction. Serious gap remains between military requirements and economic capabilities. To be hoped that questions of military organization not still outstanding can be solved.

4. Technical and Scientific—Special plea for further support scientific technical cooperation especially in view Soviet progress this area.

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 396.1-WA/4–459. Secret; Limit Distribution. Drafted by Fessenden, cleared with Nolting and Alan G. James of S/S, and approved by Timmons. Sent to the NATO capitals, Berlin, Moscow, and CINCPAC for POLAD.
1. The verbatim (C-VR(59)15) record of this session, dated April 3, is ibid., Conference Files: Lot 64 D 560, CF 1237.
2. Documentation on the Four-Power Working Group on Germany and Berlin, which convened in Washington on February 4 and reconvened in Paris on March 9 and in London on April 13, is printed in volume VIII.
3. Not found.
4. Not printed. (Circular CG–517, April 4; Department of State, Central Files 396.1-WA/4–459)
5. See Document 172.
6. On March 30, the United States and Italy signed an accord providing for U.S. missile sites in Italy and the delivery of IRBMs to Italian forces. For text, see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1959, p. 512.
7. Regarding the Heads of Government decision on IRBMs in December 1957, see Polto 1807 from Paris, December 19, 1957, printed in Foreign Relations, 1955–1957, vol. IV, pp. 253–256.
8. See Document 180.
9. Not further identified.
10. Not found.