Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Germany and Austria, Volume VII, Part 1

662 001/3–2052 Telegram

No. 76
The Chargé in France (Bonsal) to the Department of State¹

secret
niact

Paris, March 20, 1952—10 p.m.

5754. From Amb Dunn. We have just returned from a meeting with Schuman and Eden at which Adenauer was present.² Schuman outlined three points which we have in mind for the reply. First, before there can be an all-Ger govt, there must be elections and he mentioned our intention of emphasizing the role of the UN commission. Second, the Ger govt must be free to carry on in the period between the election and the treaty. Third, we cld not ignore certain points raised by Sovs re: Treaty itself; for example, national forces, restrictions on political liberty of Ger govt etc. He said we did not intend to comment on all points raised by Sov note. He asked Adenauer what he thinks is necessary for Ger public opinion and for his policy. Adenauer referred to the existence of nationalist groups in Ger which, however, in the past had been without financial backing or strong outside support. He thought Sov note wld appeal to these groups in several respects.

He also anticipated that these groups wld get financial support from the Sovs in line with apparent modification of Sov policy to support nationalist instead of Communist groups. Adenauer thought reply must clarify the sitn. He felt that conversation must be avoided as that wld give time for the strengthening of nationalist groups. He warned against treating Ger unification as something of no great importance. He urged absolute necessity of rapidly concluding our policy of integrating and strengthening defense.

Adenauer felt it was necessary to emphasize that this policy arises not only from the war but also from Sov policy. We shld point out that aim of west is to guarantee peace. He thought emphasis shld be given to our belief that all-Ger govt can only be elected in conditions of freedom throughout Ger and that UN commission is a necessary condition to dissipated doubts as to conditions in Ger. He stressed desirability of early reply and hoped it cld be sent while commission still in Ger. He thought allies shld say they were ready to follow any promising path to a solution. In reply to a question from Schuman, he expressed opinion nothing shld be said about Potsdam or frontiers except that decisions there had been provisional and not definitive. Finally, felt that we shld make point that the provision that Ger cld not enter coalitions wld end all plans for Eur unity such as Schuman planned and EDC. Addressing himself particularly to Schuman and the French, he said he had no desire for national army and wld not mind hitting at the idea of a national army in the note.

In short mtg after Adenauer left, we three gave final revisions to the draft, which I am sending by separate tel (Embtel 5749³). There is no change in substance from the draft we have already sent⁴ and we are convinced that this now is at the point where the Brit and French have incorporated the points they feel strongly shld be embodied in the note and from Adenauer’s description of his own ideas, it is clear that it also meets in gen with the line he wld like to see followed.

We are meeting tomorrow at 11:30 Paris time when a copy of this draft will be shown to Adenauer, subj, of course, to final approval by all three govts.

Both Eden and Schuman are particularly anxious to have us reach agreement on the text as soon as possible as they wish to have it despatched to Moscow before being given out for publication. It wld be their idea to have it published 48 hours after it had been delivered in Moscow. In view of the intense interest of the press in this matter and the wide speculation as to the form of the reply it wld be advisable to have it agreed to as soon as possible.

I feel that in the light of the persistent attitude of Brit and French, together with Adenauer’s views as expressed today, the text I am transmitting is about the best we can expect to get.

Bonsal

1. Repeated to London, Moscow, and Bonn.
2. Laukhuff’s minutes of this meeting are in file 662.001/3–2052.
3. The draft transmitted in telegram 5749 is the same in substance as that transmitted in telegram 2209 to Bonn, Document 78, with the exception of the final paragraph which is quoted in footnote 4 thereto.
4. In telegram 5731 from Paris, Mar. 20, Dunn reported that the drafting committee had met that morning. This meeting was followed by one with Eden and Schuman at which the text of a draft reply was agreed for consideration at a further meeting in the afternoon. The draft reply was in turn revised and its text submitted to Washington in telegram 5749, see footnote above. (662.001/3–2052)