Office of the Historian

248. Memorandum of Conversation0

Washington, June 9, 1962, 10:30 a.m.

SUBJECT

  • Carpets and Glass

PARTICIPANTS

  • Belgian Foreign Minister Spaak
  • Ambassador Scheyven, Belgian Embassy
  • Baron Rothschild, Chef de Cabinet to Mr. Spaak
  • The Secretary
  • Ambassador MacArthur

The Secretary said that before joining the others he wanted to say a few words about the carpets and glass problem. We greatly regretted the action that we had been obliged to take with respect to these two items and we equally regretted the EEC action in the form of retaliation.1

[Page 531]

Belgium, the Secretary explained, had been the victim of a conjuncture of circumstances that had forced us to increase tariffs on carpets and glass. In the first place there was substantial unemployment in these two industries, which had suffered serious injury as a result of a substantial increase in imports.

Another aspect of the problem which he wanted to mention most confidentially to Mr. Spaak was the need for the Administration to get the necessary Congressional support for the President’s Trade Expansion legislation. This was truly a most far-reaching and indeed almost revolutionary bill in terms of our traditional rather conservative approach to trade. Although the Administration was pleased with the extent to which it had been able to muster wide support, there were some hard-hitting opponents who had charged that the Administration had in the past ignored peril points and escape clause action and that the features in the new bill designed to give legitimate security to American industry would be similarly ignored. It had been necessary to give evidence of the Administration’s will to act and the items, by unfortunate coincidence, had been ones in which Belgium was primarily interested. While regretting this, the Secretary emphasized again that both the carpet and glass industries were in serious condition and the action had been justified.

As to the future, the Secretary believed that we must let matters stand where they now are and consider the matter closed. We had taken action that the EEC countries had felt injured them and they had retaliated instead of negotiating compensation. Therefore, we would withdraw our compensation offer and the negotiations, which had been terminated by EEC retaliation, would end.

Mr. Spaak said that he understood the situation but asked whether, in the case of carpets, it would not be possible to establish some “contingent” (quota). He explained that several thousand families in the Courtrai area would be unemployed because substantial segments of the carpet industry which traditionally had supplied the American market could not survive. He said this fact had created particular “emotion” with the public and with Foreign Commerce Minister Brasseur and also with Finance Minister Dequae, who came from Courtrai. Mr. Spaak believed it was most important for the President to obtain passage of his Trade Bill, but at the same time hoped something might be done in the case of carpets to permit the industry to survive.

The Secretary replied that for the moment he did not believe it possible to do anything. As to the future, we would see.

  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 411.004/6-962. Confidential. Drafted by Douglas MacArthur II and approved in S on June 15.↩
  2. See Documents 245–247.↩