Britain and France May Work Alone on U.S.A. Aid

Grey River Argus, 20 June 1947, Page 5

Britain and France May Work Alone on U.S.A. Aid

(Rec. 6.30). LONDON, June 19. A British spokesman, in Paris, said that it could be presumed that Britain and France ' would continue, alone, with plans for a joint European recovery, if Russia’s reply to the request for a tri-partite meeting in the week beginning on Monday next was a refusal, or was inconclusive. Reuter’s correspondent said: An Anglo-French communique on the meetings yesterday was withheld from publication for nine hours, out of courtesy to the Soviet Union delegation. The press officials placed an embargo on the announcement until it would have been received in the Kremlin. This was done so that the Russian leaders would not read it first in a newspaper. M. Bidault, last evening, received the Russian Charge d’Affaires, M. Ivan Avalov, to inform him of the results of the Anglo-French talks. Reuter’s diplomatic correspondent, cabling from Paris, and commenting on the short margin of time which Mr Bevin and M. Bidault had given the Russians to agree to a tri-partite meeting, said: Apart from the urgency of European economic rehabilitation, two causes have dictated the early date for the meeting. Firstly, there is the meeting on July 15, at Geneva, of the European Economic Commission. Secondly, there is the fact that United States Congress, which must endorse any plan that European countries may submit, adjourns in July, and does not re-convene until December. British and French sources in Paris have emphasised strongly that the Anglo-French invitation to Russia was not intended as an. “ultimatum”, but was sfmply dictated by the urgent necessities of the European economic situation.

The proposals emerging from the Eevin-Bidault talks make it clear that the British and French Governments regard the comprehensiveness of the European plan as the best guarantee

of success', says the Times Faris correspondent. The two Governments also agree that the promptness with which proposals are submitted to the United States, and the clarity with which they are formulated will be the best means of ensuring the willing co-operation of the U.S. Congress. Mr Bevin and M. Bidault, in discussing the broad implications of General Marshall’s offer, have kept off technicalities. They have agreed that a general conference of European Powers would not be the best instrument for achieving rapid results. The proposed tri-partite meeting was a natural alternative. It was agreed that the United States should not be invited to sit on the sponsoring body.