I hope the conference will consider that what we have said will be a contribution to bring us at least a stage nearer the successful conclusion of our labours.

STATEMENT BY THE CANADIAN MINISTER FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (THE HON. LESTER PEARSON) AT THE FOURTH PLENARY MEETING [SEPTEMBER 29]

Mr. Chairman, this item on the agenda, which I apologise for returning to-item 5-is headed "United Kingdom and United States Declarations." I assume that under it I would be quite in order in expressing great appreciation for the statements which have been made by you and by Mr. Dulles this afternoon, and I hope I would not be ruled out of order if I make a short declaration on behalf of my own country.

Your statement, Mr. Chairman, if I may say so, was one of historic importance. If it is thought, as it sometimes is, that the United Kingdom looks across the Channel more intensely in war than in peacetime, that feeling certainly must have been removed by your statement earlier this afternoon. To me it was all the more impressive because I recognise that the source of the power and the glory of this island has been its vision across the seas.

The statement of Mr. Dulles was also important, not only for the development of European unity but for that larger Atlantic Community development with which we are all concerned. Indeed, as I see it, European unity cannot be effectively secured unless the lines not only across the Channel but across the Atlantic are strong and unbroken. My country has a part to play in this Atlantic aspect of the problem. Therefore, we accept the continuing obligations arising out of our membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and we are resolved to continue to do our best to discharge them. The disappearance of EDC does not, we think, affect those obligations, because EDC-though we were indeed disappointed in its disappearance because EDC, as we saw it, was a means to an end and not an end in itself. We are here to find an alternative method to accomplish the same purpose. That alternative method, that alternative arrangement, must include the association of Germany not only with the defence of Europe and the West, but-and this is, I am sure, equally important-with the development of the Atlantic Community; an association to be brought about in such a way that the fears that we have inherited from the unhappy past will be replaced by a new and better hope for the future.

So new methods are being discussed this week and new solutions are being sought. As far as we are concerned, however, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization remains the focal point of our participation in collective defence and of our hope for the development of closer co-operation with the other peoples of the Atlantic Community. As such, it remains a foundation of Canadian foreign policy. Indeed, enduring and whole-hearted support for NATO is for us a policy above politics on which I think our friends can rely.

That support in defence matters is now worked out each year by

consultation through the appropriate agencies of our organizationthat is, NATO. Apart from mutual aid, it now takes the form of naval forces, an infantry brigade group, an air division of 12 jet fighter squadrons stationed in Europe. We will continue to assist in the common defence through the existing NATO procedures until better ones are agreed on. The presence of these Canadian forces on the European continent is not only a measure of our military contribution to the common defence but an evidence of our belief in the future of the North Atlantic Community.

While we emphasize, then, our belief in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, we welcome the proposed extension of the Brussels Treaty. We shall look forward to a growing relationship within the framework of NATO to the Brussels Treaty countries with whom we are bound by such close ties.

We are sure, and I hope our confidence will be realized-I know it will-that these new arrangements through Brussels can be developed without weakening or diminishing NATO in any way in its essential functions, because NATO, with Germany associated with it under agreed arrangements, should, we think, be a stronger force than ever against war, and for the progressive development of the Atlantic Community.

We are also certain, Mr. Chairman, that in this development the United States, which has played such a magnificent, generous, and indeed essential part, will continue to be able to do so. Mr. Dulles has given us hope in that regard this afternoon.

We Canadians, being neighbours of the United States, know as well as anybody else that that country does not fail to accept and to meet, successfully, any great international challenge which faces it. We are certain that in the days ahead it will continue to meet the challenge of assisting in the development of European unity and the Atlantic Community-and the two go together.

The work, then, which we are doing this week must, in order to suc ceed, make possible the continued contribution of the United States to these great objectives. If that is done, and I know it is going to be done, it will also, I assure you, make it much easier for my own coun try to continue to do its share.

Annex III

PAPER ON A

CONFERENCE

GERMAN DEFENCE CONTRIBUTION AND ARRANGEMENTS TO APPLY TO SACEUR'S FORCES ON THE CONTI

NENT

The nine Governments represented at the London Conference agree to instruct representatives to draw up in Paris, in concert with the military and civilian agencies of NATO through the Secretary General, detailed proposals, for approval by the North Atlantic Council, for a German defence contribution and arrangements to be applied to SACEUR'S forces on the Continent. These detailed proposals shall be based on the following principles agreed between the nine Governments:

1. (a) The seven Brussels Treaty Powers will conclude a special agreement setting out the forces each of them will place under SACEUR on the Continent.1

(b) The German contribution shall conform in size and general characteristics to the contribution fixed for the EDC brought up to date and adapted as necessary to make it suitable for NATO.

(c) The terms of this special agreement will be agreed with the other NATO countries.

(d) If at any time the NATO Annual Review recommends an increase above the figures in the Brussels Special Agreement such increase will require the unanimous approval of the Brussels Powers expressed in the Brussels Council or in NATO.

(e) The Brussels Powers will ask that arrangements be made for SACEUR to designate a high-ranking officer who will be instructed to transmit regularly to the Brussels Treaty Organisation information acquired as indicated in 3 (f) below in order to permit that Organisation to establish that the figures agreed among the Brussels Powers are being observed.

2. All forces of NATO countries stationed on the Continent of Europe shall be placed under the authority of SACEUR, with the exception of the forces which NATO has recognised or will recognise as suitable to remain under national command. The strength and armaments on the Continent of the internal defence forces and of the police belonging to the members of the Brussels Treaty Organisation shall be fixed by agreements made within this Organisation, taking into account the task for which they are intended and on the basis of existing levels and needs.

3. Arrangements to apply to SACEUR's forces:

(a) Forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent shall be deployed in accordance with NATO strategy.

(b) The location of such forces shall be determined by SACEUR after consultation and agreement with the national authorities concerned.

(c) Such forces shall not be redeployed on the Continent nor used operationally on the Continent without his consent subject to appropriate political guidance from the North Atlantic Council.

(d) Forces placed under SACEUR on the Continent shall be integrated as far as possible consistent with military efficiency.

(e) Arrangements shall be made for the closer co-ordination of logistics by SACeur.

(f) The level and effectiveness of forces placed under SAceur on the Continent and the armaments, equipment, logistics and reserve formations of those forces on the Continent shall be inspected by SACEUR.

1 See Protocol No. II to the Brussels Treaty; supra, pp. 977-979. The defense contributions of each of the members of the proposed European Defense Community were fixed by a Special Agreement signed at Paris, May 27, 1952, the text of which has not been made public.

See article 5 of Protocol No. II to the Brussels Treaty; supra, p. 978.

17. STATEMENT BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE ON THE RESULTS OF THE LONDON CONFERENCE, OCTOBER 4, 1954 1

The London Conference produced solid results. It worked out a system, in place of the European Defense Community, which can preserve and strengthen the Atlantic community by giving it a hard core of European unity. Thus, it salvages many of the values of the EDC plan and will give opportunity for the other values to be achieved by further effort. The fact that all of this was done, and done within 33 days of the rejection of EDC,2 shows the vitality of the Atlantic community. Under this new plan:

German sovereignty will be restored, and beginning today the Allied High Commissioners will forego the exercise of most of their occupation rights.3

Germany will join NATO and make its indispensable contribution to the defense of the West. This will be done within a continental system of armament controls.

Western unity will be developed within the framework of the Brussels Treaty. The treaty members will become identical with the projected membership of EDC, the United Kingdom being an additional member. Their Council will have broad authority and can act in many important matters by a majority vote. Thus national authority gives way to European authority.

The United Kingdom has made a momentous long-term commitment of its military forces to the continent of Europe.

4

Much of what was agreed on will, of course, require further approvals by other nations and by parliaments.

When I went to London I said that the initiative rested with the European powers. They had exercised that initiative.

5

The result is what the Europeans decided on for themselves. The United States will, I hope, cooperate with the result, because to do so will be very much in our national interests.

18. COMMUNIQUÉ ISSUED AT PARIS BY THE FOREIGN MINISTERS OF THE NINE POWERS, OCTOBER 21, 1954 6

The Foreign Ministers of Belgium, Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (M. Spaak, Mr. Pearson,

1 This statement was made by Secretary Dulles at the Washington National Airport on his return from the London Conference; Department of State Bulletin, Oct. 11, 1954, p. 519.

2 The French National Assembly voted against ratification of the Treaty Establishing the European Defense Community, Aug. 30, 1954.

3 See Section I, "Germany," of the Final Act of the London Conference, supra. 4 See annex II to the London Conference Final Act, supra.

5 See Secretary Dulles' statement of Sept. 25, 1954; Department of State Bulletin, Oct. 4, 1954, p. 489.

Ibid., Nov. 1, 1954, p. 638.

M. Mendès-France, Dr. Adenauer, M. Martino, M. Bech, M. Beyen, Sir Anthony Eden and Mr. Foster Dulles) met in Paris on October 21st to complete the discussions begun at the recent London conference on security and European integration within the framework of a developing Atlantic community dedicated to peace and freedom.1 The Ministers were informed of the agreement reached between the Foreign Ministers of France, the German Federal Republic, the United Kingdom and the United States of America in regard to ending the occupation regime in the Federal Republic.2

The nine Ministers then considered the reports of the working parties set up in Paris and London to give effect to the principles agreed at the London conference. They reached agreement on the text of four protocols strengthening and extending the scope of the Brussels Treaty Organization, expanded to provide for the participation of Italy and of the German Federal Republic, and on the text of accompanying documents.3

They agreed that the London working group consisting of representatives of Belgium, France, the German Federal Republic, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom should remain in being during the interim period before the formal accession of the German Federal Republic and Italy to the Brussels Treaty Organization.

The Ministers expressed to the secretaries general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and of the Brussels Treaty Organization, who were invited to be present at the meeting, their thanks for the valuable preparatory work done in the two organizations between the London and Paris conferences and for the facilities placed at their disposal by NATO for their meetings in Paris.

19. RESOLUTION OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL, OCTOBER 22, 1954 4

Resolution to Implement Section IV of the Final Act of the London Conference Concerning the Powers of the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe

THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL:

1. Recognising the necessity of strengthening the structure of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and of reinforcing the machinery for the collective defence of Europe, and desirous of specifying the conditions governing joint examination of the defence effort of member countries,

1 See the Final Act of the London Conference, Oct. 3, 1954; supra, doc. 16.

2 Agreement of Oct. 23, 1954; supra, pp 483–485.

3 See supra, pp. 972-989.

London and Paris Agreements, September-October 1954 (Department of State publication 5659; 1954), pp. 32–35.

415900-57--98