Office of the Historian

243. Telegram From the Acting Secretary of State to the Embassy in France1

Washington, October 10, 1957—8:06 p.m.

Topol 1019. This telegram summarizes for guidance and info addressees recommended US position for discussion proposed European Free Trade Area at OEEC Ministerial Meeting October 16 through 18. Additional detail and background included position paper being pouched USRO:2

1.
Chief problem facing Ministers will be basic divergence between UK and Continental conceptions FTA (with some differences among Six on extent to which FTA should or must parallel Common Market Treaty).
2.
Success of negotiations for FTA (to include the Common Market as a unit) would have important advantages for US policy in reinforcing European Unity and extending to wider area economic benefits expected from Common Market. Breakdown of negotiations could adversely affect European cohesiveness to detriment US political and possibly (through NATO) to US strategic objectives. Breakdown, by forcing recourse to bilateral deals, could also be detrimental to multilateral trading system which is objective US policy. On other hand problems posed by FTA are extremely complex and it is highly unlikely that they can be resolved in one meeting.
3.
Should bear in mind, also, that in view of political importance of European integration looking to permanent solution of age old Franco-German problems, US firmly committed to success of European Common Market and wishes avoid any delay in its implementation because of possible divergences re FTA.
4.
Proposed FTA is European initiative and major differences of view must at this stage be resolved by parties directly concerned.
5.
Consistent foregoing, chief aim US delegation should be to prevent breakdown of negotiations on fundamental issues. “Taking [Page 565] account our status as Associated Country, delegation should participate in limited manner only in actual discussions in open meeting. However, US Representative should reaffirm in meeting support of US for FTA which would provide multilateral framework of association between European Economic Community and other OEEC members …”3 If necessary he may indicate US would be disappointed at failure meeting agree move forward on some commonly accepted basis, or at least provide procedures for so doing.
6.
Improbable that US delegation will find it practicableor desirable make detailed comment on various specific issues which have arisen FTA working party deliberations. May however if appropriate comment in general terms re following:
a.
FTA should promote achievement multilateralism and convertibility.
b.
US hopes for satisfactory solution agricultural issue which will not result in discrimination against other free world nations beyond that incident removal internal barriers.
c.
US hopes for equitable formula for including or associating less-developed OEEC countries with FTA.
d.
US interested in workable arrangements re institutional and general economic matters “which will maximize benefits arising from removal of trade barriers within the Area.”

Foregoing takes account Timmons–McCarthy telecon Oct. 9.4 Dept. preparing draft statement for Burgess which will be cabled soonest.5

Herter
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 440.002/10–1057. Confidential; Priority. Drafted by Myerson and approved by Dillon. Repeated for information to Luxembourg (for the Embassy and Butterworth), Bonn, Brussels, The Hague, London, Rome, and Geneva (for USDel GATT); also passed to USRO for information.↩
  2. Reference is presumably to Topol 1034 to Paris, October 11, not printed. (Ibid., 440.002/10–1157)↩
  3. Ellipsis in the source text.↩
  4. Not further identified.↩
  5. The text of Burgess’ draft statement was transmitted in Topol 1034 to Paris, October 11. (Department of State, Central Files, 440.002/1–1157)↩