Foreign Relations of the United States, 1951, European Security and the German Question, Volume III, Part 1

740.5/5–851: Telegram

The United States Deputy Representative on the North Atlantic Council (Spofford) to the Secretary of State ¹

secret

London, May 8, 1951—8 p.m.

Depto 902. Dept pass Ottawa. Deputies 35th mtg May 7.

1. Van Zeeland, attending as chairman NAC, proposed council meeting early July on grounds

(a) Not wise to have too long interval between ministers mtgs.

(b) About two months preparation needed.

(c) Events moving fast, council shld take stock of present status and future plans, review Deputies actions, shld use new procedures created by reorganization,² with both FonMins and DefMins attending, and

(d) Public opinion, vital to NATO, needs event on which to focus and simple summary of NATO achievements.

Alphand agreed that council as reorganized shld be used but pointed out many major issues may not be resolved by July; e.g., Ger participation, division of costs, CFM. He felt important to seek most propitious moment which might not necessarily be July. Van Zeeland replied such issues might continue hazy for some time. Suggested it possible to proceed with plans for council discussion of defined problems and concrete achievements.

UK said date not so important as council being able to produce tangible results but thought this probably by mid-summer.

US expressed view that, for public reaction, next mtg of council shld take “important” action. Believed this possible by early July. Joined UK in saying council shld consider state of military plans and preparation, and any recommendations on “gap”. Also shld consider status production effort on which DPB wld be able report.

Italy concurred in view that early mtg desirable and extended invitation to meet in Rome if mtg held in Europe.³

Canada agreed with UK and US, but felt that govt shld consider carefully if desirable to proceed with council mtg before possible CFM.

Van Zeeland urged Deputies press preparations for council mtg to be held as soon as concrete results possible.

2. Van Zeeland drew attention to need for further measures to exploit defense production potential. Herod said there has been progress in national production for national forces but little success in developing production for transfer. Said question of military acceptability of types sometimes delaying, but not foremost obstruction. (Suggested potential better used if DPB had influence on funds, or better coordination with US end-item, and other MDAP aid and with US or off-shore procurement, or by promoting exchange of raw or non-defense materials for defense products, a system which wld amount to bilateral barter unless made multilateral.)

Janne, chairman DPB, supported Herod. Said root of trouble is national reluctance to budget for expenditures abroad. Urged planning US aid be re-directed, in collaboration with DPB, to give incentive to international approach, and that other incentives (e.g. prefinancing and price concessions) be considered.

UK recognized need for further steps but felt others might follow UK policy of placing maximum possible orders abroad.

Neth said there was also question of ability of foreign firms to fill orders. Suggested govts be more fully informed with view to creating priority system.

3. Chair announced conclusion of Iceland–US agreement⁴ and arrival for first contingents for defense Iceland. To UK question, Iceland Deputy replied believed bases available all NATO states in time emergency.

[Here follows a report on the discussion of infrastructure costs and country contributions towards the cost of SHAPE. The major items included in the category of “infrastructure” were the airfields, communications networks, depots, and other installations essential for military operations.]

7. Next mtg today.

Spofford

1. Repeated to Paris for OSR, to the capitals of the other NATO countries, to Frankfurt, to Heidelberg, and to Wiesbaden.
2. The reorganization of NATO, as discussed under the many revisions of the Canadian proposal, received the definitive approval of the Council Deputies in its 34th meeting on May 2. (Telegram Depto 879 from London, May 3, 740.5/5–351)
3. Spofford had reported in his telegram Depto 852 from London, April 30, that he had received a letter from the Italian Deputy stating that the Italian Government would welcome a meeting of the newly reorganized North Atlantic Council in Rome in the near future, with both Foreign Ministers and Defense Ministers attending (740.5/4–3051). For further documentation on the scheduling of the NAC eighth session in Rome, November 24–28, following the seventh session held in Ottawa, September 15–20, see pp. 616 ff.
4. See Foreign Relations, volume iv .