FRANCE AND NATO WITHDRAWAL WILL BE COSTLY TO FRANCE AND HER ALLIES

Press, Volume CV, Issue 31017, 24 March 1966, Page 12

FRANCE AND NATO WITHDRAWAL WILL BE COSTLY TO FRANCE AND HER ALLIES

IBy the Ports correspondent of the "Finonc-iot Times "I [Reprinted from the "Financial Times" by arrangement I

General de Gaulle’s abrupt decision to withdraw from military integration in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (N.A.T.0.) and to expel allied forces and headquarters from the national territory will prove expensive to France as well as to her allies. The evacuation of military personnel will deprive the French economy of a large and steady flow of purchasing power, several thousands of civilians will lose their jobs, and French contractors and suppliers will lose an important part of their clientele.

At this stage reliable estimates of the loss are difficult to come by. One figure puts total annual spending by the American bases in terms of official contracts at 200 million dollars, while the salaries of the 4000 military personnel and 1200 civilians at the United States headquarters at St. Germain en Laye, together with those of the staff of 3500 at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers, Europe (S.H.A.P.E.), represent a further 25 million dollars a year. U.S. Bases

The United States bases in France, of which the most important are the air bases at Chateauroux, Toul-Rozieres, Evreux and Laon, employ about 16.000 civilians, and in some areas they will find it difficult to secure alternative employment. This is especially true of the 3500 employed at Chateauroux. where there is little industry, as well as in Lorraine and the Haute Marne, where the departure of the Americans will exacerbate the problems of declining traditional industries. The two Canadian air force bases near Metz have a military staff of some 3500. On the other side of the fence, the finding of alternative installations for the forces and headquarters at present in France will also cost a considerable amount of money. Since the foundation of the Alliance, a cumulative total of some £1239 million has been spent on infrastructure in N.A.T,0., a large chunk of which is in France. At this stage the N.A.T.O. authorities are still debating whether General de Gaulle’s move justifies the release of classified information on the infrastructure in France, but it certainly includes a network of oil pipelines, airfields, a limited amount of radar, and the main N.A.T.O. communications network. The Ace High radio chain, which stretches from northern Europe through France down to Turkey, is now virtually completed, and will have cost about £2B million. But it seems almost certain that the removal of the military headquarters from Paris will entail the resiting of a a number of transmitting stations. On the other hand, the N.A.T.O. Air Defence Ground Environment (N.A.D.G.E.) early warning system, which is due to cost 300 million dollars has still not been started, and contracts may not be awarded for a couple of months. This may give time to re-evaluate the project in the light of the French move.

The N.A.T.O. pipeline system consists of a line from the Channel to Belgium, coupled to a pipe from the Mediterranean, and is linked up to the American pipeline from the Atlantic to Germany. If General de Gaulle insists on complete French control of the network, it must be expected that the Allies will look elsewhere. On the other hand, the capacity of the pipeline is already partly leased out to the civil petroleum companies, and it may well be that N.A.T.O. could now do with less petroleum than originally required at the height of the cold war. At this stage of the game,

however, it is impossible to have any clear idea of the modifications which may be required in the N.A.T.O. infrastructure by the French withdrawal, or to put a figure on the cost which would have to be borne by any one of the Allies. The French have still not made clear how much access they want to have to N.A.T.O. facilities: it must be assumed that they will need to be wired into the communications and early warning networks, but it cannot be expected that France will contribute to the cost of deploying the integrated N.A.T.O. headquarters or building alternative bases and depots. New Homes The rehousing of the military headquarters is still very much an open question, though it is widely assumed that a new home will be found for S.H.A.P.E. and Allied Forces Central Europe in one of the Low Countries. Modern communications systems would no doubt make it possible for them to operate from Britain, but most of the Continental countries would probably interpret this as a move away from Europe At the same time, the merger of the Coal and Steel Authority into a single European Commission in Brussels will leave the E.C.S.C. building vacant in Luxembourg, which may therefore push for

N.A.T.O. as a replacement But when they move, the two N.A.T.O .military headquar ters are likely to be cut down in size. The latest figures show that the integrated headquarters throughout N.A.T.O. from Norway to Turkey, employ 19,000 personnel, and the efforts to cut out some of the Parkinsonian fat which has already started will inevitably be precipitated by the move from Paris. ‘The NATO, political headquarters at the Porte Dauphine would normally be expected to follow the military commands in a move from Paris. The French appear to

want to prevent this, partly because they draw a distinction between the Atlantic Council set up by the treaty and the integrated military organisations, partly because they hope to be able to obstruct the redeployment of N.A.T.O. But Allied sources are confident that the decision on whether the political headquarters stays or goes will not lie with the French. At this stage, there has been almost no discussion on whether it would necessarily move to the same place as the integrated commands.