Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Western Europe and Canada, Volume VI, Part 1

850.33/6–2252: Telegram

No. 50
The Ambassador in France (Dunn) to the Department of State¹

secret

Paris, June 22, 1952—3 p.m.

8021. Re Embtel 7888, June 17, 1952.² Subject is Schuman Plan and EDC.

We understand interested Mins of six countries are indirectly in contact on question of creation of common polit auth in anticipation of their mtg now postponed to first week of July. Spaak, in particular, has been very active as a go-between with FedRep, Italy and France. Other countries apparently look to Schuman to take initiative, but it is possible that Schuman may not go as far as FedRep and Italians are now willing to go. Current discussions and indirect exchanges of views center on fol four related points:

1. Council of Eur resolution adopted at last Strasbourg mtg³ recommends that either Schuman Plan Assembly or Council of Eur Assembly itself proceed to take further step towards polit unification. It appears to be generally agreed among six Schuman Plan countries that Schuman Plan Mins shld definitely decide that Schuman Plan Assembly, which will also be Assembly of EDC, shld be the one to act rather than Council of Eur Assembly.

First, importance is attached, on the one hand, to speed efforts toward creation of supranational polit institution to exercise authority over coal and steel and defense communities; this will go long way toward meeting criticism, made especially in France, that EDC means creation of an army freed of effective polit control. On the other hand, it is deemed imperative that moves toward creation of polit auth be closely associated with Schuman Plan and EDC and appear to follow as logical third step made possible by first two; in this way it is sought to defeat any tendency to use moves toward polit unity as pretext to delay or avoid ratification of EDC (on theory that EDC unnecessary, since complete integration about to be achieved). It is for these two reasons that it is desired to employ Schuman Plan–EDC Assembly rather than Council of Eur. All these considerations are in line with Pleven’s recent remarks, see Embtel 7974.⁴ It is clear that if wisely handled, initiative for polit unity can ensure quick EDC ratification; if bungled it could endanger prospects.

According to Cavaletti, senior Ital EDC delegate now in Paris and deputy chief Ital del, Schuman and Ital Amb have agreed that Alphand and Cavaletti wld advise other EDC dels at June 24 mtg of EDC Interim Comite of Franco-Ital position along above lines and intention to discuss matter at Mins mtg in first week of July.

Efforts of Boothby and other Brit dels to Council of Eur Assembly to have problems of polit unification discussed not by Schuman Plan Assembly but by all Council of Eur countries, each having equal voice, is suspected by Spinelli, Secy Gen of Eur Union of Federalists, to whom we have talked, and by others, as effort actually to prevent further integration among Schuman Plan countries. Spinelli points out that if Council of Eur is to be forum in which work is to start, not only will there be no concrete results because of inability of countries such as UK really to participate, but suggestions will inevitably be made for watering down even of Schuman Plan and EDC in order to attempt once more to secure Brit participation. This wld be pointless and wld be bound at very least to subject EDC ratification to long delay. Monnet and Alphand point out further, in same sense, that in Council of Europe framework, Greeks and Turks may evince interest in joining polit community. Any community with such wide membership at this time cld clearly have no more than a weak and artificial character; discussion of it wld serve to delay work on the real thing.

Finally, Monnet, in arguing for Schuman Plan rather than Council of Eur Assembly, points out that in latter question of representation for Saar wld be met at the threshold. In former that question is solved in a serviceable manner.

2. Spinelli and Spaak are anxious that Schuman Plan Assembly, in doing its work with a view to polit unification, be required by its terms of ref to keep its eye on the ball and that it conclude by recommending to govts an actual draft instrument of unification, ready to be acted upon. In this way they hope to avoid inconclusive results and adoption merely of broad general resolutions exuding good will and nothing else. They are anxious that no action be taken in implementation of Section 1(c), article 38 of EDC treaty, which deals with revising structure of EDC institutions; they fear such action wld encourage postponement EDC ratification on theory EDC being changed anyway. Monnet and Alphand are aware of this problem.

3. Monnet tells us that Brit Govt has asked Schuman Plan Mins to express views on UK proposals submitted to Council Eur concerning Brit relations with coal and steel community. Fr in particular, really desire that close association be worked out both because of substantive benefits and because they feel that close association with UK will serve to attract Socialist support for Schuman Plan and for EDC ratification. Monnet, however, considers Brit proposals in their present form to be unworkable. Moreover, he agrees with Ger and Ital position that association with UK must be on completely reciprocal basis and not interfere with necessity for Eur community to have clearly independent administrative organization of its own. There is general agreement that it is impossible to give Brit voice in Schuman Plan and EDC governing bodies while Brit maintain complete sovereignty in areas in which member states have ceded portions of theirs to these governing bodies.

Hayter, Brit Min Paris, raised question of Brit association with Schuman Plan with Monnet who replied that before formalizing association, there shld be an understanding with Brit on common objectives to be obtained by association and study of ways to achieve it. According to Monnet, Hayter said that his govt wld probably prefer to do this after high authority is organized rather than prior to Mins mtg. Monnet agreed, but there may be further informal discussion with the Brit on this question next week.

Monnet is also anxious to bring up organizational relationship for cooperation with US and Canada. His point is that Eur community cannot exist with solely Eur ties, it must develop in larger framework of NATO. This Monnet believes work of NATO. This Monnet believes, is further illustration of inadequacy of Council of Eur as vehicle toward further unification of Schuman Plan-EDC countries. We tend to agree with Hayter’s view that it wld be preferable to postpone final decision on US organizational relationship with Schuman Plan until after high authority is established, location of institutions is decided, and responsibilities to be given to Schuman Plan institutions are known.

4. In view of Ger opposition to Paris and of desire to demonstrate to Fr Socialists that Fr wishes the community to be associated closely with other countries in Council of Eur, Fr will probably propose Strasbourg as temporary site of Schuman Plan institutions. However, nearly everyone seems to be unhappy about this solution. It is pointed out that building space, housing, press facilities and air transport are not adequate. Moreover, even Council of Eur only meets in Strasbourg a few days each year and sub-comites usually come to Paris in order to perform their tasks. It is also mentioned that EDC commissariat, at least, must be in Paris, because of SHAPE; and desirability of creating polit Eur community within framework of, and in close association with, Atlantic argues for establishment of capital of polit community close to NATO site in Paris.

Dunn

1. Repeated to London, Bonn, The Hague, Brussels, Rome, and Luxembourg.
2. Document 46.
3. This is a reference to the resolution adopted on May 30 by the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe; for information concerning this resolution and the Fourth Ordinary Session (First Part) of the Consultative Assembly, see Document 38.
4. Not printed; it informed the Department of State of a statement made by Pleven and quoted in the Le Figaro issue of June 19 following the National Assembly’s approval of the government’s military budget. (740.5/6–1952)