88. Memorandum for the Record0
The following summarizes discussions which Ambassador Houghton and I had with Minister of Defense Guillaumat, with his Generals Lavaud and Martin participating to some extent.1
[Here follows discussion of other subjects.]
In this connection, I mentioned that we were very much disappointed at the delays that had occurred in the broad questions pending [Page 163] with the French such as the question of storing atomic weapons in France for their and our use. M. Guillaumat indicated that while he and the military were just as anxious as we were to make progress in these areas there were broad political questions pending between General de Gaulle and Mr. Dulles which would have to be settled on that level. Further discussion of these broader questions seemed inappropriate but I was left with the impression that M. Guillaumat’s advice to his government would be constructive and favorable from our standpoint.
The atomic submarine was discussed briefly. M. Guillaumat gave me to understand that they were working out the security problem by the device of putting naval officers who were technically competent in charge of their Atomic Energy Commission (Commissariat) operations in this area so that the French Navy would assume responsibility for the security of classified information we would be turning over to them. M. Guillaumat said they originally thought that all they needed was enriched uranium but they had come to the conclusion that they could make much faster progress if they could receive full information on the design of the atomic submarine. There was no mention of the possibility of their Commissariat obtaining additional quantities of enriched uranium for longer range submarine reactor development work. It was understood that best progress could be made by separating out the nuclear submarine agreement from other pending atomic matters.
There was no discussion of other NATO cooperation questions such as integrated air defense, implication being that these were in the broad category of subjects to be covered by General de Gaulle and Mr. Dulles. I would feel confident that the French military, including the Minister of Defense, would be generally of our point of view about these matters. I am sure I left with M. Guillaumat the impression that we on the military side feel some urgency in getting them settled.
It should be added that out conversation throughout was in the best of spirit, with the French perhaps showing some dissatisfaction with the way some of their work had been held up by our failure to provide information on matériel as promptly as they had hoped and with a similar show of dissatisfaction on our part with progress on some of the fundamentals of our relationships.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 102.202/1–2259. Top Secret. Prepared by Deputy Secretary of Defense Donald A. Quarles. Sent to the Department of State by William B. Connett, Jr., First Secretary of the Embassy in Paris, on January 23.↩
- This conversation took place in Paris on January 13. Quarles visited West Europe January 8–29 for discussions with European defense leaders. Highlights of his trip are outlined in a memorandum from Merchant to Dulles, January 30. (Ibid., 102.202/1–3059) Regarding Quarles’ conversation with Strauss on January 21, see Part 1, Document 186. Regarding his conversation with Portuguese officials on January 28, see Document 283.↩