Foreign Relations of the United States, 1948, Germany and Austria, Volume II

740.00119 Council/6–148: Telegram

The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Douglas) to the Secretary of State

top secret   us urgent

London, June 1, 1948—4 p. m.

2385. Delsec 1773. For Saltzman from Douglas. In final meeting of delegates this morning,¹ French failed to reiterate their previous reservation on timing and all remaining papers were agreed, except that French maintained general reservation on communiqué pending US–UK approval to be given this afternoon of a brief statement which Bidault can make re continuation of reparations to France. Notwithstanding this evidence of French willingness to drop their insistence on delay in timing, I still feel it very important for US and UK Government to approve conference recommendations prior to French debate and, in informing French of such approval, to emphasize strongly that our time schedule is of the essence. Bevin assured me this morning that, whereas he hesitated at this juncture to suggest that the Labor Party should as a party exert its influence on the French Socialists, he will instruct UK Ambassador, Paris, to make strongest representations regarding importance of maintaining time schedule to Bidault prior to French debate and to advance date of debate.

In same conversation, Bevin informed me that under the blanket authority he had received from British Cabinet he was to avoid delays implicit in veto and was to proceed without delay in authorizing submission constitution to Germans in event French at that time seek to block such submission by unilateral action. He would, of course, desire to give French reasonable opportunity to express their views, but after receiving such views he would proceed in harmony with us. Since we made the above suggestion for informal understanding believe we should give British same assurances.

In presenting new language suggested by Department for inclusion in new section III of report (ReDeptel 2016 May 31²), I explained that our reasons for proposing this additional language are that we are anxious to avoid requiring the inclusion or exclusion of any specific form of joint consideration and to leave the form of such consideration dependent upon such developments as may occur. I said we felt that the new language accomplished this purpose in the most satisfactory manner. The French and other delegates accepted this explanation and agreed to the inclusion of the new language. Because of the importance which this language may have in the future, I recommend that this cable, together with the one of last night (Delsec 1772³) reporting statement by me yesterday that language did not imply ministerial consideration, be attached to the paper concerned.

Sent Department as 2385, repeated Berlin as 163.

Douglas

1. In subsequent telegrams Ambassador Douglas reported upon other aspects of this final meeting of the London Conference on Germany. Telegram 2391, Delsec 1774, June 1, 6 p. m., reported that the final meeting had resolved the remaining differences on the communiqués and the Report (740.00119 Council/6–148). Telegram 2404, June 1, 7 p. m., stated that the Report had been signed at 5:30 p. m. It also reported that the Conference had agreed upon the following statement as appropriate to be made by Foreign Minister Bidault in the French Chamber of Deputies:

   “The question of reparations from Germany has been discussed through diplomatic channels among the occupying powers of the Western Zones and I have been given assurances by the other two and we all agree that inasmuch as the quadripartite reparations allocating machinery is now, at least temporarily, inoperative, means will be found promptly, during the period in which the condition exists, to resume the making of allocations from capital equipment in the Western Zones of Germany for reparations purposes.” (740.00119 Council/6–148)

2. Ante, p. 304.
3. Telegram 2376, May 31, p. 303.