Conference files, lot 60 D 627, CF 203
No. 501
Memorandum by the Counselor of the
Department of State (MacArthur) to the Secretary of
State1
I met with Malik, Roberts, and Seydoux after the plenary session this afternoon.2 Malik produced a paper from which he read, saying it was a rough outline of a communiqué. It was blocked out along the following lines:
An opening sentence said the four Foreign Ministers had met from January 25 to February 18 in Berlin to consider (the agreed agenda of the Conference was listed here).
There was then, apparently, four paragraphs following. The first one said the four Ministers met to consider Agenda Item 1 (which was listed again in full). There was a blank to be filled in tomorrow, depending on the outcome of the restricted session tomorrow morning. The next paragraph dealt with Agenda Item 2 and said the Ministers had discussed this matter and it would be useful to continue examination of German questions in the interests of peace and European security, etc. The next paragraph dealt with Agenda Item 3 and was to be filled in following the discussion on Austria tomorrow. A final paragraph in essence said the Berlin Conference had been useful in enabling the Ministers to exchange views and would greatly facilitate the future consideration and solution of the problems examined.
It is perfectly obvious that the Soviets are doing what we expected they would do and are trying to build up expectations that we have made real progress and that solution of Germany and Europe is just around the corner. This would be seized upon in France by neutralists and opponents of EDC to block EDC.
I told Malik I believed he was under a misapprehension about the purposes of our meeting. As I understood it, there had been no agreement by the Ministers this morning3 to a quadripartite communiqué. [Page 1160] The purpose of the meeting of the four of us, as I understood it, was to exchange views as to whether in the event of further agreement were reached tomorrow, in what form these agreements might be published. One possibility was simply that they would be agreed Conference documents and released to the press at the conclusion of the session. I added that if the only agreement that is registered is the one on disarmament, it would hardly be worthwhile issuing a communiqué. On the other hand, if an agreement were reached on Agenda Item 1, it might be worth registering this agreement publicly in some way, but as we saw it, under any circumstances any communiqué that might be issued would be a simple announcement of the agreed decisions of the four Ministers and nothing more.
Seydoux and Roberts took a somewhat similar line, although Roberts was perhaps a little bit more “diplomatic” and left the door open a bit, it seemed.
I feel very strongly that if there is to be any communiqué it should be simply: an opening sentence to the effect that the four Ministers have reached the following agreement (or agreements)—the item on disarmament as agreed this morning would then be listed, and if there is an agreement on Item 1, that would be listed, and that would be all. Do you agree?
I should add that Alphand is desperately worried that if we imply that Berlin will result in a solution by further discussions of the problem of Germany and European Security, EDC is a dead, dead duck.
- A handwritten notation on the source text indicates that Secretary Dulles saw it. Copies of this memorandum were also sent to Merchant, Bowie, Tyler, Morris, and Nagle.↩
- For a report on the twentieth plenary, see Sectos 159, 162, and 160, Documents 498, 499, and supra.↩
- For a report on the fifth restricted session, see the U.S. Delegation verbatim record, Document 495.↩