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

850.33/7–2552: Telegram

No. 72
The Ambassador in France (Dunn) to the Department of State¹

secret

Paris, July 25, 1952—8 p.m.

583. Re Embtels 582² and 581.³ Subject is Schuman Plan—seat of institutions.

This tel contains our reconstruction of discussion at yesterday’s mtg of Schuman Plan ministers concerning seat of Schuman Plan institution based on info we have been able to obtain from sources who attended most but not all of plenary session.

1. FonOff has apparently been receiving reports during past week from German press that Fed Rep might be willing to consider favorably the idea of locating Schuman Plan institutions in Saar if France proposed it. Schuman’s interest was particularly aroused by report he recd from Grandval two days ago that Fed Rep Economics Minister Erhard had visited Saar last week and talked to Van Bock, Saar industrialist. Grandval apparently intimated that this conversation also indicated German receptivity to this idea which Grandval and Saar govt have been pushing. In face of these reports Schuman apparently felt that if he failed to propose Saar as permanent headquarters Schuman Plan he might be accused both in Germany and France of not making sincere effort to solve Saar problem; he has apparently been much troubled recently on this subject. He therefore decided apparently at last minute to make this proposal at ministers mtg Wednesday. As previously reported he did not discuss this with Adenauer before mtg, and decision apparently came as surprise to most of French officials responsible for Schuman Plan.

2. In his opening speech to ministers mtg Wednesday afternoon Schuman said that while several other cities had presented candidacies for Schuman Plan capital backed by very good arguments he thought this matter shld be considered in the light higher political consideration. He noted that Saar problem had all along been a major obstacle to implementation of policy European unification, and expressed fear that tension on this subject might increase during next few months. The French Govt, he said, therefore considered that it cld not let this opportunity pass to propose a solution to this difficult problem.

He therefore proposed that in order to make the Saar “the first federal realization of the European community” the ministers shld agree in principle that the Saar wld be Europeanized and wld be made the permanent seat of Schuman Plan institutions as soon as agreement cld be reached among all the interested parties on a definitive solution to the Saar problem on a European basis. In the meanwhile he proposed that Strasbourg shld be chosen as temporary seat of institutions. While it was apparently not Schuman’s intention to link idea of Saar as permanent seat with that of Strasbourg as temporary seat, other ministers apparently assumed that such a link existed and this misunderstanding later led to considerable difficulties in ministers mtg.

As previously reported other ministers all expressed their surprise and said they were unable to take a position on this proposal without giving it some thought. Adenauer in particular seemed taken back. He asked a number of questions, in particular concerning the exact territory to be included (perhaps ref to idea that piece of Lorraine might also be made a part of federal district), the political regime which wld be envisaged for the Saar and the fate of the Franco-Saar conventions. At the first mtg Adenauer apparently treated Schuman’s proposal as a round about way to get Strasbourg accepted as temporary capital. Of the other ministers only De Gasperi appeared favorable to Schuman’s idea.

3. Other ministers then proceeded to make their own proposals. Adenauer proposed The Hague and was supported by Stikker. Van Zeeland in lengthy speech extolled the virtues of Liege. Bech proposed Luxembourg as capital remarking that “all of the good arguments invented by Van Zeeland apply even better to my own capital.” Van Zeeland then suggested that the institutions shld spread around in all of the member countries, idea which was apparently strongly opposed by De Gasperi.

Discussion was continued at private mtg of ministers with no advisors present on Thursday morning. While we have no direct info on this mtg, we understand that nothing of substance was added to previous day’s discussions. Because of assumed link between Saar and Strasbourg serious danger appeared of deadlock on entire subject of Schuman Plan headquarters.

4. At Thursday afternoon mtg, The Hague lost some ground, in particular because Van Zeeland was adamant in vetoing Dutch Capital as potential headquarters. Strasbourg appeared to be gaining ground. At this mtg also, Adenauer agreed he would be willing to undertake discussions with French on definitive settlement of Saar question.

During course of discussion, Van Zeeland insisted that question of Saar could not be settled apart from other questions before Minister, in particular distribution of jobs on high authority and court. With stage thus set for bargaining, lengthy discussion ensued. Upshot was tentative agreement to postpone all decisions on ministers agenda for six weeks or so. Under this formula, treaty would come officially into force at this time, but members of high authority would not be named, none of Schuman Plan institutions would meet, and nothing at all would happen until next ministers mtg at end of August. Ministers then adjourned for dinner.

After mtg, Monnet and other members of French Schuman Plan del insisted to Schuman that this agreement was impossible, and would have to be reversed. They pointed to severe public disillusionment which would follow failure of this mtg to come to agreement, disillusionment which might lead to wholesale public abandonment of support of entire European policy. They envisaged that in public eye French proposal concerning Saarbrucken would be blamed for failure of mtg. Finally they noted that agreement on abolition of Ruhr Authority was scheduled to be signed today, and that postponement of effective entry into force of Schuman Plan might throw that schedule off and cause serious embarrassment with US and UK, who were also signatories to agreement (British Embassy on instructions from London, had previously expressed to French FonOff British preoccupation with possible delay in liquidation of Ruhr Authority). Schuman finally agreed with his advisors that it was necessary to take decision at this mtg which would make it possible to start Schuman Plan rolling.

5. At evening mtg, Van Zeeland returned to charges, apparently insisting that if Belgium were to give up Liege candidacy, it shld receive in return at least vice presidency of high authority, even if new post had to be created for that purpose. (It had always been understood that vice presidency of high authority shld be German.) He said that Belgian candidate Eyskens would not accept nomination to high authority unless he was assured of this post (Eyskens was also reported to be dissatisfied with salaries which had been agreed upon for high authority members). Other ministers refused to consider adding second vice president on grounds this was contrary to treaty and would only be ruled illegal by court.

In confused discussion which followed, Van Zeeland finally said he might be willing to accept Turin as temporary capital. Italians naturally accepted this proposal, and other ministers, who were very tired after almost 14 hours of continuous mtg, came close to agreeing to this suggestion, which in fact was carried prematurely as decision by some of this morning’s papers. However, they finally decided that Turin would not do.

As discussion continued, attention turned more and more to Luxembourg. On two occasions five of ministers had definitely agreed on Luxembourg as temporary capital, but Van Zeeland continued to place absolute veto on this agreement. It was only after several hours that other ministers were finally able to persuade him to agree to permit first mtg of high authority and court to be held in Luxembourg, with entire question of temporary and permanent seats to be re-examined at subsequent ministers mtg.

6. Final decision was as contained in communiqué: high authority and court will meet in Luxembourg on Aug 10, assembly in Strasbourg on Sept 10. Temporary seat will be discussed at next ministers mtg around Sept 15. French and Germans will discuss Saar question on basis internationalization of territory. However, our sources stated that there was no commitment by other ministers to place permanent capital in Saar even if French and Germans agreed.

7. It appears that nobody was fully satisfied with outcome of this rather confused series of mtgs. However, members of French del are apparently considerably relieved that total breakdown, which seemed very possible for much of the session, had been averted. They are also happy that agreement was reached on designation of members of high authority and court, and that this question will therefore not be permitted to confuse discussions on Schuman Plan headquarters at next ministers mtg. They hope it will be possible to reach more satisfactory conclusion at that time.

Dunn

1. Repeated to London, Bonn, Rome, The Hague, Brussels, Luxembourg, and Strasbourg.
2. Supra.
3. Not printed; it informed the Department of State of a conversation which Dunn had with Hayter concerning British views on the location of the Schuman Plan High Authority. Hayter was instructed by the Foreign Office to state that the British were not in a position to support any particular candidacy but only wished to ask that the Saar be given consideration. (850.33/7–2552)