Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Western Europe, Volume VII, Part 2

57. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom⁰

October 11, 1958, 6:51 p.m.

3694. Paris for Embassy and USRO. In meeting with UK Embassy (Elbrick-Hood)¹ today it agreed recent events, especially Adenauer-Macmillan meeting, dictate change in timing of reply to de Gaulle. Presently planned to draft further reply de Gaulle during coming week which would, essentially, suggest holding three-power exploratory informal discussion in Washington on Ambassadorial level about two weeks after delivery. Replies would be generally similar in concept but not worded alike.

At time delivery such letter to French anticipated Adenauer, Fanfani and Spaak would be informed both of meeting and reasons for holding it.

In replies proposed we not simply pose series questions, as Chauvel had suggested to Foreign Office, but raise certain warning flags and take issue on some points de Gaulle has made. Would conclude that because of complexity subject we agreeable three-power discussion Washington in two weeks.

Recognizing that while we would not want draw public attention to such informal discussion French might do so, agreed that we should tell French at some time that we must keep Spaak, Adenauer and Fanfani informed. In addition letters noted above we would also recognize necessity keeping certain interested NATO parties informed during and after Washington talks.

Generally agreed de Gaulle has put finger on problem of NATO but has proposed unacceptable solution in tripartite inner directorate. He has raised two problems which are not necessarily related: extension NATO responsibilities and France’s position in NATO. Second seems of most importance to him so that improvement NATO alone would not satisfy him. British noted de Gaulle seeking greater say in nuclear matters which poses real problem.

Considerable attention paid to role of Spaak. We noted Secretary’s belief Spaak needs get into matter. British informed us Spaak to see de Gaulle on Wednesday to give him written comments on memorandum.² Roberts authorized discuss matter with Spaak in advance. Was noted that difficulties loom ahead as it probably impossible prevent leakage Spaak actions to Rome and Bonn Foreign Offices. While this is problem we must live with, hope it would be mitigated by actions contemplated above.

Dept plans initiate drafting beginning next week. Will keep addressees advised and welcomes their comments.

This cable based on uncleared memo of conversation.

Dulles

0. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 740.5/10–1158. Secret; Limit Distribution. Drafted by Brown and approved by Timmons. Repeated to Paris, Bonn, Rome, and Ottawa.
1. A memorandum of this conversation, dated October 11, is ibid., 751.11/10–1158.
2. Spaak did not meet with de Gaulle. (Telegram 1341 from Paris, October 14; ibid., 740.5/10–1458) In reply to a letter from Dulles of October 10, Spaak wrote on October 15 that he intended to have his written comments on de Gaulle’s memorandum “transmitted” to de Gaulle. (These letters are printed in Part 1 as Documents 160 and 161.) Burgess transmitted to the Department of State a draft of Spaak’s October 15 letter to de Gaulle in French in Polto 991 from Paris, October 15. (Department of State, Central Files, 740.5/10–1558) No other draft of Spaak’s reply to de Gaulle has been found, but Spaak later summarized his response in Combats Inachevés, pp. 182–187.