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

662.001/5–1152: Telegram

No. 99
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Gifford) to the Department of State¹

secret
niact

London, May 11, 1952—8 p.m.

5131. After working group agrmt on proposed changes Dept’s text draft reply to Sov note (Deptel 5808, May 9²) as contained in Embtels 5129 and 5130, May 10³ Roberts took modified draft to Eden in country returning this morning with Eden’s instructions. In meantime Crouy-Chanel had also recd instructions from Paris.

At working group mtg today, Roberts stated his instructions were to insist on London draft contained Embtel 5037, May 6,⁴ which had already been accepted not only by Fr and Br but by Adenauer and Reuter. He said that Eden was considering instructing Franks to make a strong plea to Secretary to return to London draft. Crouy-Chanel also stated preference of Paris for London draft. Holmes pointed out, among other things, that if Eden held to this position there was no hope of agrmt in time to help him in Commons debate Wednesday.

In discussion which followed it became apparent that principal concern of both Br and Fr was their own and Ger public opinion. They consider reply in order to be effective must speak not only to those who are convinced of rightness of our joint policy of building strength in West Europe but must contribute to silencing the doubts of those who suspect our policy and who constitute a polit problem of first magnitude in Ger and Fr and of growing concern in Br. It must help Eden in his debate next Wednesday. Over longer pull it must help Attlee and Co handle Dalton and Co. It must avoid a tone which both Br and Fr believe many Gers wld find in Dept’s draft that in fact their choice is between our policy of integration, and Ger unity. In that case they both fear Gers will choose unity. These are the reasons why both insisted on changes in para 2 and the re-insertion of para 5 from London draft. They feel that both these are necessary to meet Adenauer and Reuter views. When pinned down both agreed that order of Dept presentation was an improvement and much of London draft remained verbatim. Fol proposed changes were then worked out which are in addition to those contained in Embtel 5129 and 5130 including substitution of para 2 from London draft (Embtel 5037, May 6) for para 2 Dept’s draft as modified yesterday.

Roberts now advises us that Eden has accepted Dept’s draft with proposed changes agreed this morning and yesterday. Crouy-Chanel believes that it meets objections of Paris and will be acceptable. Br and Fr wiring authority Bonn and Berlin to show to Adenauer and Reuter. Assume McCloy has authority to do same and will notify Lyon.

Clean text containing cumulative changes resulting from yesterday and today’s mtgs in next fol msg.⁵

Discussion of proposed changes agreed at today’s mtg fols:

[Here follows a list of specific drafting changes in the text of the note.]

Gifford

1. Repeated to Bonn and Berlin.
2. Document 97.
3. Telegram 5129 reported that the draft transmitted in telegram 5808 had been generally accepted by the tripartite working group with the exception of paragraphs 9 and 10. It continued that the revised text, which was indicated by the specific comments transmitted in telegram 5230, was the best that the U.S. representative was able to achieve and was also the one most likely to produce early tripartite agreement. (662.001/5–1052)
4. Document 95.
5. Telegram 5132 from London, May 11. (662.001/5–1152) For text of the draft submitted in this telegram, see the note from the U.S. Embassy in the Soviet Union to the Soviet Foreign Ministry, Document 101.