396.1–PA/3–1751

The United States Representative at the Four-Power Exploratory Talks (Jessup) to the Secretary of State

secret

Dear Dean: Just a few lines at the end of our second week to give you a few personal impressions of the way things are going—or not going.

It is of course always impossible to be sure what the Russians are up to but personally, I do not yet see any signs which lead me to believe that they are going to break off. Although I think Chip1 is not convinced of it, I still think they want a meeting of the Ministers and, if this is true, we will get one on terms satisfactory to us if we wait long enough and if the French and British stay in line.

As far as the French are concerned, I think on the whole their basic attitude is not too bad. As you know, Parodi is a very sincere and honest person and I am convinced that he simply cannot see why we object to including on the agenda a simple unqualified reference to “the demilitarization of Germany” as a separate item. Curiously [Page 1096] enough, he thinks that a simple reference to the question of German armament would be very bad. Apparently, that question has overtones and connotations which he feels would be upsetting to French opinion, whereas I tried to point out that the unqualified use of the word “demilitarization” has similar overtones and connotations for American opinion. It is true that, as he indicated during the Pleven visit in Washington,2 he has vague hopes of eventually reaching some kind of interim agreement with the Soviets about Germany which would lessen the tension, although we have never been able to find out from any of the French just what they have in mind. From his point of view, it would be very bad indeed if we do not get a meeting of the Four Ministers. I do think, however, that he is pretty well convinced that we are right in insisting that the best way to get such a meeting is to continue plugging along firmly on our lines. Nevertheless, the point may very well come when Gromyko makes further gestures in the direction of our phrasing and where the issue will be sharply drawn on whether or not the phrase “demilitarization of Germany” can be used alone.

The British attitude is more puzzling. As far as Davies is concerned, I am sure that a great deal of the difficulty is due to his ineptness and lack of experience in dealing with the Russians. He made another speech yesterday afternoon which was put in just the wrong way and led to Gromyko’s outbursts against what he called the British ultimatum.3 I am afraid that this morning Davies will try to explain this away and in doing so will blunder into statements suggesting to Gromyko that instead of an ultimatum he meant we would make some more concessions to them.4 Morrison has made no gesture in the direction of seeing me and Dave Bruce agrees that I cannot very well press him. We have an impression that although Davies is one of Morrison’s protégés, Morrison is not very happy about the way Davies has been handling his job here. No one seems to have any authoritative information as to how Morrison really feels about the question of German participation in western defense.

Gromyko is about the same as ever. He has been rather dumb in some of his presentations. He has said just the things which were [Page 1097] needed to convince the British and French that he was unreasonable and he has lost opportunities to play them up against us. During the tea intermission the Russians join in socially in a very affable way. By and large, Gromyko’s statements in the meetings have not been vitriolic and, in terms of the usual Russian operation could even be described as somewhat restrained.

I do hope that you and Alice had a good time in Bermuda. It was extremely comforting to see your name appearing on the list of conferees on the telecon5 the other night and I appreciate your reference to the work here in your press conference yesterday as reported in today’s papers. Just to prove that nothing changes, I can report that the same doves to which you called Vishinsky’s attention in 1949 still perch on the tree outside the Palais de Marbre Rose, They offer an interesting bit of variety when one gets tired of looking at the ladies and gentlemen sitting on the clouds over our heads.

Sincerely yours,

Phil

P.S. Morrison has just called asking Dave Bruce and me to come see him this afternoon.6

  1. Charles E. Bohlen.
  2. For documentation on Prime Minister Pleven’s visit to Washington at the end of January, see volume iv .
  3. The U.S. Delegation had reported on the 11th session on March 16 in telegram 5486 from Paris, March 16 (396.1–PA/3–1651) which indicated that Davies, inter alia, had questioned whether the Soviet Union really desired a meeting of the Foreign Ministers.
  4. Jessup’s fears proved to be unfounded. The U.S. Delegation reported that at the 12th session on March 17 Gromyko took up most of the meeting with a long propaganda statement that repeated in general previous Soviet arguments. (Telegram 5502, March 17, from Paris, 396.1–PA/3–1751)
  5. A transcript of the teletype conference of March 14 between Paris and Washington, not printed, in which the U.S. Delegation was told not to accept any wording in the agenda which might imply suspension of the December 1950 Brussels decisions for the integration of the Federal Republic into Western Europe, is in file 396.1–PA/3–1451.
  6. For a report on this meeting, see telegram 5507, infra.