Office of the Historian

376. Memorandum of a Conversation, Palais des Nations, Geneva, November 15, 1955, 7:30–8 p.m.1

Geneva, November 15, 1955, 7:30 p.m. to 8 p.m.

USDel/MC/43

SUBJECT

  • Final Communiqué of Foreign Ministers Meeting

PARTICIPANTS

  • United States
    • The Secretary
    • Mr. Merchant
    • Mr. MacArthur
    • Mr. Bowie
    • Mr. Phleger
    • Mr. McCardle
  • France
    • President Pinay
    • M. Roland de Margerie
    • M. Sauvagnargues
    • Ambassador Joxe
    • M. Andronikov
  • United Kingdom
    • Mr. Macmillan
    • Sir Ivone Kirkpatrick
    • Sir Geoffrey Harrison
    • Lord Hood
    • Mr. Pink
    • Mr. Hancock
    • Mr. Boloshev
  • U.S.S.R.
    • Mr. Molotov
    • Marshal Sokolovsky
    • Mr. Sobolev
    • Mr. Vinogradov
    • Mr. Pushkin
    • Mr. Troyanovsky

Mr. Macmillan, as Chairman of the Conference today, opened the restricted meeting called to discuss the final Communiqué by suggesting that the form of the Communiqué be first discussed. He suggested that it be short and objective, and that if there were agreement on any of the three Items of the Agenda, such a decision should be recorded in a separate announcement on that Item. Mr. Macmillan then suggested that the Communiqué should point out that in compliance with the Directive of the Heads of Government, the four Foreign Ministers had met and had had frank discussions on all Items covered by the Directive. The Communiqué would then go on to say that the four Ministers had agreed to report the results of their work to their Heads of Government who had appointed them to carry out this work. This would leave open the question of how to deal with any future meeting of the four Foreign Ministers. He concluded by saying that if his suggestion commended itself to the other three Ministers, each could designate an adviser to a working group which could get together to draft something along these lines.

Mr. Molotov said perhaps Mr. Macmillan had a draft which he could read to the Ministers.

Mr. Macmillan replied that he thought it was better for the advisers to get together to produce a draft.

Secretary Dulles said he agreed with Mr. Macmillan’s suggestion as to the form and substance of the Communiqué, and his own thought was that the question of a future meeting of the Foreign Ministers be left for decision by the Heads of Government, since obviously the Foreign Ministers could not decide that until the Heads of Government had had a chance to study what had been done at Geneva.

Mr. Pinay said that if the Ministers were in general agreement on the form of a Communiqué, they should get a text to serve as a basis for discussion.

Mr. Molotov said he had no objection to this procedure, and agreed that the Communiqué should be short and objective, to which [Page 793] Mr. Pinay commented that the shorter it was the more objective it would be.

Mr. Molotov replied that this was “quite possible”.

Mr. Molotov then said that the idea that the Ministers should report to their Heads of Government should evoke no objections. He said that with reference to future meetings of the Foreign Ministers he would like to ask what precisely was in mind as to the subject of such a meeting, as well as the time and place.

Secretary Dulles commented that a possible future meeting was a matter for the Heads of Government to consider after they had had time to evaluate the reports of their respective Foreign Ministers.

Mr. Pinay said he agreed with what the Secretary said.

Mr. Molotov said he had simply asked about a future meeting to obtain clarification, and suggested that Mr. Macmillan as the author of the suggestion could perhaps indicate more clearly what he had in mind.

Mr. Macmillan said he had in mind that the Heads of Government would consider the reports of their respective Foreign Ministers and that the question of a future meeting of the Foreign Ministers, as well as the scope and character of any discussions they might have, would be handled through diplomatic channels.

Mr. Molotov said that Mr. Macmillan was correct in that the Heads of Government had the right to be informed by their respective Foreign Ministers. With respect to a future meeting of the Foreign Ministers, public opinion would be much interested in the kind of a meeting it was to be, as well as in its purposes and objectives.

Secretary Dulles suggested that Mr. Macmillan draw up a draft text of a Communiqué and circulate it tonight. Each Minister could this evening designate an expert and then the experts could form a drafting group to meet tomorrow morning.

Mr. Molotov said he would like to look at a text, but he was interested in the substance of the matter of the convening of another meeting of Foreign Ministers.

Secretary Dulles replied that his idea was that the question of a further meeting, as well as its scope and character, would be left for the Heads of Government to decide in the light of their evaluation of their Ministers’ reports. It could then be discussed through diplomatic channels. It was possible the Heads of Government would decide not to have another Conference because not much agreement had been reached at this one. On the one hand, it would certainly be unwise to give the impression that this Conference had resulted in what was tantamount to a break in relations between the Soviet Union and the other Western powers. On the other hand, it would not be wise to give the impression that the four Foreign Ministers [Page 794] had reached agreement on matters of substance, since this was not the case.

Mr. Pinay said that when the Foreign Ministers reported back to their Heads of Government it was up to the latter to decide what to do next, because if there was another Conference it would be a prolongation of the Conference which the Heads of Government had called.

Mr. Macmillan summarized again the scope of the Communiqué he had suggested, stressing that it would be short and objective and that it would conclude by saying that the Ministers would report the results of their work to the Heads of Government. He agreed to the suggestion that he draw up a text which would be circulated tonight, and that the drafting group could meet in the morning at ten o’clock.2

Mr. Molotov said he did not see why the idea of a future meeting should meet with objection, but reserved his position because he was not clear about the character of any future meeting.

Mr. Macmillan concluded by saying that all the Ministers should reserve their positions with respect to his draft until they had had a chance to receive and study it.

The discussion then turned to tomorrow’s meeting, and it was agreed that the communiqué drafting group would meet at 10:00; that the Ministers would meet at 11:30 to complete discussion of Item I; that they would adjourn by 1 p.m.; and that they would meet again for final plenary session at 3 p.m. to conclude the Communiqué and to make their final statements.

  1. Source: Department of State, Conference Files: Lot 60 D 627, CF 586. Confidential.↩

  2. The draft circulated later that evening by Macmillan reads:

    “In compliance with the Directive issued by the four Heads of Government after their meeting in Geneva in July, the Foreign Ministers of France, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the U.S.S.R. met in Geneva from October 27 to November 16.

    “The Foreign Ministers agreed to report the result of their discussions to their respective Heads of Government and to recommend that the future course of the discussions of the Foreign Ministers should be settled through diplomatic channels.” (Attachment to a note from the Secretary of the British Delegation to MacArthur, November 15; ibid., Central Files, 396.1–GE/11–1555)

    ↩