Your No. 1144. [1]

1. in regard to the future status and use of bases, we adhere to
our previously expressed view that this matter can only be
considered as part of an overall plan in which their role would be
defined, and in which the right to joint use and reciprocity would
be provided for. Further, that no discussion in Washington should
precede consideration preferably by the Prime Ministers'
Conference of a common British Commonwealth course of action.

2. On the question of the claim to the sovereignty of various
islands, we adhere to the opinion that if there is a claim, it
should be made openly before the permanent court, and resisted
openly.

3. We regret that, though the matter was referred to us for
observations, both United Kingdom and New Zealand felt that they
had committed themselves to the United States to hold a
Conference. In your No. 946 [2], you state that Fraser and Addison
both considered it would create misunderstanding if they withdrew
the proposal which the United States had accepted. We suggest, in
view of the American expectations which will have been aroused by
the wide scope of the terms of reference referred to in your No.

546 [3], that the limited objectives which are to govern the
United Kingdom attitude, as stated by Addison in your No. 1144,
are also likely to create misunderstanding and disappointment in
the minds of the Americans.

4. In our opinion the only sound and realistic approach is to
decide what is the bedrock viewpoint of the British Commonwealth
on the question of bases, and then to seek the agreement of the
United States to an arrangement in accordance with the provisions
and procedure of the Charter. This is the only basis on which the
Commonwealth Government is prepared to participate in discussions.

CHIFLEY