Forthcoming United States Proposal for Atlantic Nations Pact

I have the honour to report as follows.

On yesterday, Wednesday the 14th April, Mr. Pearson was my guest at luncheon. There were no others present.

We discussed a number of things; the Italian elections, the recent rejection by Russia of the United States proposal to accept Italy's application for membership of UNO now, the likely effect of the episode on the elections; and so on.

In the course of the conversation Mr. Pearson referred to the views expressed by Mr. de Valera in Washington on the question of the Western European Union. I said that I had noted the reaction in the 'Toronto Telegram' reproduced in the Montreal 'Gazette' of the 13th April (cutting enclosed).¹

Mr. Pearson said that he also had noted the reaction, and then went on to say that we would probably be asked soon what our attitude would be to some kind of arrangement as is contemplated by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. The Canadian Government had no official knowledge of the terms of any proposal which the United States might bring forward. But he understood that something along the lines of the Rio (Petropolis) Pact (August 30, 1947) would be suggested.² He knew that the articles by the Alsop brothers in the New York 'Herald Tribune' of the 7th April and by James Roston in the 'New York Times' of the 13th April had been inspired by the Department of State and approved by Senator Vandenberg.³ Mr. Pearson asked what I thought would be the reaction of our Government to a proposal on the lines, say, of the basic commitment in the Rio Pact. He said that as far as he understood what was in mind, any proposal put forward would be offered to the five Western Union countries, to Scandinavian countries including Sweden, to Ireland, Canada and so on - the Atlantic Nations.

I said that both the previous and the present Irish Government had taken an active, and, indeed, a prominent part in the work of ERP. I referred to Mr. de Valera's attendance at the Paris Conference as Minister for External Affairs and to Mr. MacBride's speech on the 16th March⁴ at the second Plenary Session of the Conference on EEC. I drew Mr. Pearson's attention to the Minister's reference to the necessity for the integration of the economy of Ireland as a whole as an essential step towards economic planning. (We did not pursue this). I said that I would be glad to let you know Mr. Pearson's view that the matter of a proposal - in whatever form - for an Atlantic Nations agreement would be coming to a head quite soon and that we might expect to be approached at some stage.

'I expect', Mr. Pearson added, 'that something definite will be put to us in the next few weeks. Your Government may have been informed in a general way already by the U.S. government. I do not know. But I should be glad if you could tell me later on whether they have had any indication so far from Washington as to the forthcoming proposal'.

I said that I would pass on his enquiry.

I asked Mr. Pearson whether Switzerland would be invited to become a party to the proposed new pact. He said that very probably the attitude to Switzerland would be something like this: 'There is the proposal. You are free to come in if you desire!'

I then asked about Sweden. 'Sweden', the Under-Secretary of State replied, 'is terrified of Russia especially since the Russo-Finnish business. She will find it difficult to join'.

I made no reference to Spain having regard to General Marshall's recent sharp refusal to extend the FAP [Foreign Aid Programme] to Spain. I am aware, moreover, of Mr. Pearson's own very hostile attitude to General Franco.