Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Western Europe and Canada, Volume VI, Part 2

751.5 MSP/8–1152: Telegram

No. 536
The Chargé in France (Achilles) to the Department of State¹

secret
priority

Paris, August 11, 1952—3 p.m.

895. Cotel.

1. In connection Deptel 784, August 9,² pls see Embtel 879, August 9,³ which apparently crossed your message.

2. Pinay letter of August 8, quoted Ref Embtel, provides clear indication of Fr interpretation relation $186 million Pleven OSP (plus unspecified amount of electronics) to $650 mil of budgetary support, namely, that the $186 million is additional to the $650 million. You will note that last para Pinay letter states that matériel to be covered by the $186 million (plus electronics) is not within Fr budget.

3. In this connection, fol background shld be recalled. When we recd from Fr the Pleven May 6 list, we specifically asked them whether any of the items of such list were included in the Fr 1952 budget or were to be included in future Fr budgets. Fr said that answer to both parts of question was no. As you know, Fr had two inconsistent lines of argument. One was that if US did not contract for Pleven May 6 items, Fr wld not be able to go forward with their production. Other was that pol and social consequences of cancellation cld not be tolerated and that their CY 1952 and future budgets wld have to be rearranged to carry forward the production of any of the Pleven May 6 items which US was not prepared to finance under OSP. As previously reported, we felt latter course of action wld be one that Fr wld follow with respect to major items. To recapitulate, items on Pleven May 6 list were at time of presentation, clearly outside CY 1952 Mil budget and outside of future mil budgets for planning purposes. US inability to purchase the Pleven May 6 items, other than the items represented by the $186 million (plus electronics) created for Fr a new sitn. Present position, according to Pinay letter, is that the items covered by the $186 million (plus electronics) remain outside present and future budgets. We understand Fr are now considering how to rearrange their CY 1953 Mil budget in order to make room for those items of Pleven May 6 list not to be financed by US under OSP.

4. Re para 5 Deptel 784, we are endeavoring to obtain from Fr fullest possible indication their present thinking about size and composition CY 1953 Mil budget. In this connection we are asking Fr to define in more specific terms statement in Pinay letter that “Fr plans for 1953 will be built around a Fr contribution calculated on the basis recommended by the TCC.”⁴

Achilles

1. Repeated for the information of SRE.
2. This telegram informed the Embassy that the Department of State was now able to clarify French aid prospects for fiscal year 1953 in light of the Congressional cuts in Title I funds. (751.5 MSP/8–952)
3. Supra.
4. Telegram 915 from Paris, Aug. 12, summarized the Embassy’s understanding of how the French looked at the various figures that comprised their 1953 military budget. (751.5 MSP/8–1252)