204. Telegram From the Department of State to the Mission to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Regional Organizations1
48337. NATUS. Ref: Paris 3048.2 Subj: France-NATO—The Constitutional Question. We agree fully with your proposition that it would not be productive to seek early consensus among Allies on future form of [Page 467] France’s relationship to NATO and NAC. As you rightly put it, that relationship will evolve as sum of series of decisions, agreements and disagreements over coming months.
At this stage it is not clear what would be most advantageous form for a continuing relationship. In meantime we do not want US to become involved in either stirring up others or working toward crystallization in formal relationship between Fourteen and NAC. Formalizing a new definition of relationship between France and NATO would be out of question in near future and we think for December Ministerial Meeting.
Primary factor of importance is to maintain formula for relationship which emerged from Brussels, i.e. Ministers “assume that France does not claim the right to call in question decisions on policies on which she has renounced participation.” Precedent exists in way NAC has functioned, with Iceland totally quiet on many matters because it makes no military contribution and indeed Luxembourg saying little because of its very limited area of activity. France is effectively moving toward role rather like Iceland. Since she seems to be moving to limit herself, there is no reason for us to push.
It is premature to try to draw distinctions about future constitutional role of NAC. Treaty says it is established “to consider matters concerning the implementation” of the Treaty without limitations on its competence. Fourteen is ad hoc group and remains to be seen what will be its continuing role and whether or not it is transitory. We welcome fact that Brosio has assumed chair of Fourteen and that France has withdrawn from Military Committee. Both developments will contribute to more businesslike conduct of NATO affairs. In course of that process Brosio and PermReps of Fourteen will need to be on guard to ensure in NAC and other areas of common activity that France participates, is silent, or absents itself as its own activities make appropriate, but it should not be accepted that France could block NATO business in which it does not participate.
In short we would like to let matters develop further before we try to foreshadow long-term constitutional changes such as having Fourteen meet regularly as the Council on military questions. Needless to say we should continue to give internal consideration to this important problem.