203. Telegram From Secretary of State Rusk to the Department of State0
Secto 8. Berlin for USDel. Paris for USRO. Reference Secto 7.1 First subject raised with Chancellor by President in afternoon general discussion was how we should state our position re status of MLF.
President stated it had been our view last winter that both Italians and British should be participants. Now picture had become somewhat obscure but we did not wish cease our efforts. What should our position and posture, both public and private, be over next six months?
Chancellor said he felt there would be new elections in Italy before very long. As for UK, no one knew what would happen there. He thought best position to take was precisely that set forth in communiqué which had just been approved.2 Believed that was all could be said now, with final note being that negots would continue.
In response President’s inquiry where negots would take place, Secretary said he had told Schroeder in morning meeting3 that we [Page 598] would be discussing matter shortly with British in London and Italians in Rome and then would have further discussions with Germans. There had been no talk in specific terms where these subsequent negots would be held. We had felt we could come back to this question later.
Chancellor suggested these further discussions be held in Washington.
President said there was not much practical likelihood that British would be willing do more than merely discuss MLF. Brit Govt was faced with coming elections, critical labor attitude, criticism from Mountbatten, etc. Italian internal political situation was not good. He therefore doubted if much progress could be made in near future. But it was necessary to keep concept alive for a year or maybe more, even though there were just two of us participating. Meanwhile we should put flesh on other mechanisms which would be suited to needs of FedRep; otherwise we might be faced with situation in fall where we had vacuum, particularly if Italian elections did not turn out well. What was needed was period of time to consider building up of alternatives as well as strengthening of existing mechanisms. In other words, we should continue discussions of MLF through summer and fall and review situation at that time. If outlook then not good, we should consider such things as how we might strengthen IANF and improve coordination in field of nuclear policy and control over nuclear strategy. In this way we would know best way to proceed if we should fail in MLF project—which he hoped we would not.
Chancellor said Germans interested in seeing MLF established, but had no great illusions they were making any terribly significant contribution to it. US was leading power in project and had all the experts. Chancellor reiterated suggestion for Washington as place for further discussions. President said he agreed; we would go ahead with talks in Washington and then consider in fall where we stood. Chancellor added that advantage of talks in Washington would be to emphasize to British and Italians this was serious business and they would be more likely participate than if talks scheduled in Bonn.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, Pol 7 US/Kennedy. Secret; Limit Distribution. Repeated to Berlin, London, Rome, and Paris. No time of transmission is indicated on the source text.↩
- Dated June 26, it transmitted a general summary of President Kennedy’s conversation with Adenauer and Rusk’s conversation with Schroeder on June 24. (Ibid.) President Kennedy was in Bonn as part of a trip to Bonn, Berlin, Dublin, London, and Rome, June 23–July 2.↩
- For text of the communiqué, see Documents on Germany, 1944–1985, pp. 848–849.↩
- A summary of Rusk’s conversation with Schroeder was transmitted in Secto 11, June 25. (Department of State, Central Files, Pol 7 US/Kennedy)↩