840.00/6–1247: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in France
2143. Personal for the Ambassador. 1. As stated in my Harvard speech, before US Gov can proceed much further in efforts to alleviate European economic situation there must be some agreement among European countries as to requirements of situation and part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by US Gov.
2. It has become increasingly clear that US financial and economic aid to individual European countries on a piecemeal basis cannot alone solve the situation. There is definite limit to amount of such aid. American people and Congress will not support continued loans or grants or other tangible economic aid if no end in sight and if various steps taken by us are unrelated. Moreover, it would seem that economic health and public morale of the needy countries would be greatly improved if they sought to evolve a definite European program in lieu of continued individual shots in arm.
[Page 250]3. Role of US Gov is to give friendly aid in drafting European program and later to support program so far as may be practical. However, extent of any US assistance likely to be dependent on sincerity and effectiveness of effort and courageousness of approach displayed by European countries in attempting to help themselves. If initiative and readiness to bear public responsibility are not forthcoming from European Govts (whether through ineptness, fear of Soviet obstruction, or otherwise) it may be impossible for us to aid in changing decisively the course of events.
4. Because of our vital interest in European rehabilitation and our position as occupying power, it is important that we know as soon as possible to what extent a European program is politically and technically feasible. We have therefore undertaken independent and realistic study of entire problem European rehabilitation. In order further this study, I am seeking frank views Chiefs of certain European Missions on following among other points:
- a.
- The economic situation of their respective countries and the measures required for its remedy;
- b.
- Whether there is any element in the situation which makes it likely that US may be faced with any urgent and desperate demand from that quarter for assistance within the next year;
- c.
- Whether and to what extent the respective economic difficulties could be relieved by better exchanges (commodities, financial, manpower, etc.) with other areas of western and central Europe or other countries;
- d.
- The nature of the main obstacles to be overcome if such improved exchanges are to be made possible;
- e.
- To what extent their respective countries might contribute to general European rehabilitation if these obstacles were removed; and
- f.
- The general state of mind of responsible Govt leaders in their respective countries with respect to a possible program of European rehabilitation, the degree to which they are inhibited by Russian or communist pressure in considering such a program and the prospects for their initiative or cooperation in working it out.
5. The geographic coverage of and forum for considering any program of European countries will depend on answers to the above questions as well as on other imponderables. For example, if it should develop that there was some real hope that all European countries would cooperate in formulating and carrying out a European-wide program, its coverage could be broad and it could be developed in the Economic Commission for Europe. On the other hand, if it should be agreed that Soviets would oppose or employ obstructionist tactics against a European-wide program, the Western European nations should be able to find means of evolving a regional program. In such event it might be desirable to advance proposals in the Economic [Page 251] Commission for Europe in first instance. In any event it would seem desirable to avoid any implication of commitment to use any one exclusive channel either in developing information or implementing program. The primary responsibility for this must rest with European countries.
6. Scope and nature of program is not yet foreseeable. It might be possible for program to be somewhat along lines Monnet Plan1 but on much larger scale involving several countries. On the other hand, it might develop that most feasible thing is to concentrate on few matters of vital importance to Europe such as food, coal and transport.
7. Your despatches and telegrams over the past months have been most helpful to Dept in its attempts to come to grips with this overall problem. Many of the questions raised have already been dealt with by you. However, it would be particularly helpful now if you could give us benefit of your personal views on this difficult subject, with particular reference to questions outlined in paragraph 4 above. If you consider some type of European program feasible, please also give your opinion as to possible individuals who might spearhead its preparation, whether they be French or other nationals.
- A plan for reequipping and modernizing French industry.↩