187. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Germany0
2408. Following is unofficial translation of text of letter from Chancellor to President delivered to White House today by German Embassy:
Begin text. April 4, 1963
Dear Mr. President:
“I thank you for your letter of March 29,1 which Mr. Tyler handed over and explained to me in Cadenabbia on April 2nd.2 I welcome the opportunity to enter into a frank exchange of views with you on the question of the multilateral MRBM-force, which is, also in the opinion of the Federal Government, of very great importance for the alliance, and which should come into being as soon as possible.
“Members of my government and I, myself, have had talks with Ambassador Merchant, talks which have strengthened the conviction of the Federal Government that the multilateral force is a grand opportunity to further the cohesion of NATO and to counter the threat to Europe brought about by the increasing nuclear potential of the Soviet Union. [Page 552] The Federal Government is determined to participate in the realization of this project and to share to a large extent the considerable burden connected therewith.
“I welcome your intention to sign, during your forthcoming visit to Europe in June of this year, a preliminary agreement of the heads of government of those states which want to participate in the multilateral force. The Federal Government will do everything in her power to bring about, by that time, a clarification of the problems still open.
“I share your view that, after the previous contacts between our two governments, there are only two important points left that need clarification.
“The first point is the equipment of the MLF with surface ships or submarines. Certain arguments brought forward by Ambassador Merchant for the military usefulness of surface ships are being recognized by my government as justified. With regard to some points we still have doubts, especially in assessing the survivability of surface ships and the efficacy of enemy submarines. These questions need further discussion by our experts. I suggest, therefore, that as soon as possible a group of high ranking German experts discuss thoroughly with American experts the military aspects of the MLF. In these discussions, it might also be possible to examine the military as well as the financial implications of your proposal to consider surface ships for an initial phase and to include submarines into the MLF at a later date, should this seem appropriate in the light of the experience collected.
“In the public opinion of the Federal Republic and of other European countries, there are certain reservations concerning the assignment to the MLF of surface ships, because these vessels are considered as second rate and as a mere stop-gap. Should the discussions between experts which I have suggested lead us to the conviction that surface ships are the most qualified carriers for the MRBM’s of the MLF, my government will use all the means at its disposal to secure the approval of this solution by Parliament and public opinion in Germany.
“The second point discussed in your letter, namely the unsolved question of how to settle the final control, has found even more interest in the public opinion of the Federal Republic and of other European states. The Federal Government recognizes the validity of your argument that the use of the multilateral forces would most probably necessitate the aid of the strategic potential of the USA and that, therefore, a decision on the use of the MLF contrary to the wishes of the United States would be problematic.
“On the other hand, we have the responsibility to build up the MLF in such a way that it is regarded by public opinion as a genuine participation of the European NATO partners in nuclear responsibilities and [Page 553] that it offers a stimulant for other NATO states to participate in the MLF at a later date.
“I believe that the differences in opinion of our two governments are not unsurmountable and that a compromise can be found. The Federal Republic has already proposed to provide the principle of unanimous decision for a transitory period and only after some years to proceed to a system of majority decision. On the other hand, Ambassador Merchant has stated that the American Government is ready to reexamine, in the light of the experience gained, the system of unanimous decision after several years. I think that these two proposals can be harmonized and I might suggest that this problem be discussed between our two governments without delay.
“I have read with interest the list enclosed in your letter of the points to be included in a preliminary agreement about the MLF. The draft is a good basis for further negotiations between the interested NATO states during the next weeks. It is acceptable for us in principle subject to clarification of the two problems of the MRBM carriers and of the control.
With kindest regards,
Adenauer”
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, Def 12 NATO. Secret. Drafted by Brandin, cleared by the White House and Tyler, and approved by Creel.↩
- See Document 185.↩
- In his report on the meeting with Adenauer, Tyler stated that the Chancellor was convinced of the military and political value of the MLF. (Telegram 2049 April 2, from Rome; Department of State, Central Files, Def 12 NATO)↩