122. Telegram From the Department of State to the Mission to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Regional Organizations0

Topol 929. Polto 804.1 [Here follow delivery instructions for Rusk’s letter to Stikker.]

[Page 352]

“Dear Mr. Secretary-General:

Thank you for your letter of December 18 in which you gave me your evaluation of the present atmosphere in the NATO Council with regard to the Berlin question.

I share your concern about the effect which the continuing differences among us may have upon the solidarity of the Alliance. As I told my French, German and British colleagues in Paris earlier this month, we must give serious thought to the question of mutual confidence among ourselves. I asked them this question: to what extent are our problems related, not to the Soviet Union, but to a lack of mutual confidence as to our intentions and willingness and ability to work together? I continue to feel that we must solve our own internal problems before we can hope effectively to face the Soviets.

At the same time, while recognizing that the NATO Alliance has undergone strain, I am hopeful that we can bridge our differences. Underlying any difficulties on the question of negotiations with the Soviets is the essential unity of the 15 on the non-negotiability of our vital interests in Berlin. This is a critical point to remember when we begin to worry about the cohesion of the Alliance. Furthermore, I agree with you that the Paris NATO meeting was a very effective exercise in political consultation which, in the case of Berlin, provided for a frank and uninhibited consideration of the respective positions of member Governments. It was particularly valuable to me in enabling me to hear the forcefully expressed opinions of those whom you have referred to as the ‘Other Eleven’.

While this exchange of viewpoints did not result in much forward motion, we were able to work out an arrangement within the Alliance under which we will resume exploratory contacts with the USSR. The nature and timing of our approach to the Soviets as well as the instructions to be sent to Ambassador Thompson were discussed by the President with Prime Minister Macmillan last week. In the context of the Paris discussions, it was agreed that Ambassador Thompson should seek an appointment with Gromyko as soon as possible after January 1 to attempt to ascertain whether any basis exists for meaningful negotiations. In his initial approach, Thompson will limit himself primarily to exploring Soviet intentions on access arrangements. He will not raise the other major aspects of the Berlin problem such as the status of West Berlin, the relations between West Berlin and the Federal Republic, or the broader questions of Germany including frontiers and reunification. Since it is intended that Thompson’s initial probe will be of an exploratory nature only, and will not include negotiations, it should not be of long duration. However, if on the basis of this probe it is decided that grounds for negotiations exist, a Foreign Ministers’ Meeting will presumably follow. In any event, we will keep you fully informed regarding [Page 353] the outcome of Thompson’s approach and will also ensure that the Council is informed.

In closing, let me say that I greatly admired your firm and skillful handling of the NATO Ministerial Meeting under somewhat trying circumstances.

I look forward to seeing you towards the end of January, at which time we can discuss further these questions of mutual concern. Ambassador Finletter will be in touch with you to work out precise dates for your visit. Meanwhile, warm greetings for the new year. With warm regards, Sincerely, Dean Rusk.”

Rusk
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 375/12-1861. Secret; Verbatim Text; Limit Distribution. Drafted by Van Hollen.
  2. Document 118.