611.51/3–2853: Telegram
No. 588
The Secretary of
State to the Embassy in
France1
5016. Paris pass Bruce. Friday afternoon plenary session opened with Mayer reviewing history Saar issue. Referred 1946 US position favoring economic integration Saar with France and fact that document setting forth position formally approved by US, UK Governments at Moscow April 1947 and confirmed by US January 1950. Stated status quo desired by both French and Saar populations essential element of Saar financial equilibrium. France aware political, economic and cultural realities of Saar and did not intend de-Germanize area or attack cultural patrimony, but emphasized certain clauses in EDC and contractual agreements make it necessary that Saar situation be defined. Said this reaffirmed in French-German agreement on establishment Coal-Steel Community. French ready at any time hear from Adenauer and regretted delay in resuming French-German negotiations. Referred to French–Saar Convention of 1950 under which both parties committed to review of provisions when Saar gained European status, but said status quo should be maintained until question settled within context EDC and CSC. Declared Saar economic attachment to France constitutes only reparations France has received from Germany. Said Saar issue not invented by French to delay EDC agreement, but declared no French-German agreement can exist without settlement questions of such importance to France particularly with reference to CSC. Claimed Saar brings balance into Community and position would be different if Saar were in German mark area. Declared French parliament would certainly require some agreement on Saar issue prior to EDC ratification.
Secretary replied compulsions of today more powerful than legal record. Said US Government cannot take position that terms of EDC and contractuals make Saar settlement legal prerequisite; if so Saar settlement would have been negotiated at same time, US and UK would not have ratified contractuals and EDC ratification within six months would not have been contemplated in EDC Treaty. Referred to conversations in Bonn with Adenauer who said he was ready proceed with negotiations at any time; expressed [Page 1339] hope that negotiations would be resumed and said US would do its best to promote rapid resumption and be helpful.
Riddleberger referred to problem of military production in West Germany and expressed US hope more liberal instructions could be given Allied representatives on Military Security Board so that production limited quantity and type military equipment in Germany could commence. Pointed out relation to off-shore procurement which cannot get underway without agreement on production.
Re occupation costs and German military build-up, Riddleberger pointed to inability NATO Annual Review Committee complete examination German submission and expressed hope amount allocated for German build-up can soon be set and agreement reached on occupation costs. Related problem to situation in EDC Interim Commission where French have delayed study of German submission which outlines plans for German defense contribution for FY 1954.
On recruiting for French Foreign Legion in Germany, Riddleberger said US doubts whether such recruiting authorized by Occupation Statute but recognizes French position in matter, particularly in context Indochina struggle. Allied High Commission, however, now faced with protests from Adenauer and US hopes German sensibilities can be considered.
Regarding war criminals, Riddleberger said German pressure is rising and suggested consideration of implementation of Mixed Board arrangements now that Germans have ratified contractuals.
Bidault replied these problems require application of treaties not yet in force and in some instances suggested solutions not in accord with treaties. He could not agree to implementing Treaties or Agreements which had not yet entered into effect. (Details of Bidault’s arguments against points raised by Riddleberger contained in minutes being airpouched.)
Said no Foreign Legion recruiting bureau established in Germany but France could not prevent Germans from enlisting. Agreed French Government would take into account “justified complaints”.
Secretary said US Government attaches importance to above French-German problems since some pertinent to US in context of contribution to strong military posture in Europe, but believed specific solutions should be left to experts.
Re Atlantic Pact, Mayer expressed French belief in necessity for planning on longer term basis. Believed NATO could make preparation national programs more effective, less costly by system of longer term programs.
[Page 1340]Humphrey said US had French thoughts in mind but believed longer range planning very difficult until immediate problems settled.
Secretary expressed hope US could get in position to see ahead more than one year, but pointed out problem must be faced in terms of US Government position and said issue would come up in April NATO meeting. Reaffirmed US desire to give high priority to a really effective program calculated to produce success in Indochina.
Mayer expressed appreciation of US difficulties re commitments for long term planning but pointed out NATO had already started such planning with respect to armament and infrastructure.
Re financial aspects of military effort Mayer pointed out serious budgetary deficit and indicated volume French effort can be considered when extent US aid known.
Referred complex procedure for off-shore procurement and expressed belief efforts should be made towards simplification. Stassen said OSP procedures under consideration and US would welcome study by technical experts. Pointed out special category OSP established at Lisbon to meet French desire acquire French military budget items rather than NATO military items and expressed hope special category could be eliminated in next Fiscal Year.
Bidault raised question of exchange of letters re US support of French position in North Africa, produced two alternate drafts and suggested study by experts. Secretary agreed to examine drafts but made clear there was no commitment that US would agree to such an exchange.
Agreed that communiqué as drafted by working group could be discussed at Saturday meeting with view to issuance by 3:00 P.M. Saturday afternoon.
- Drafted by Wilson and cleared with MacArthur. Repeated to London, Bonn, and Saigon. The minutes of this second plenary session, circulated as document FPT MIN–4 of Apr. 14, are in Conference files, lot 59 D 95, CF 141.↩