MOST IMMEDIATE

GERMAN SETTLEMENT

1. We are deeply concerned at reports that the United Kingdom are
not prepared to support full participation in negotiations by the
Dominions and other substantial belligerents to the extent which,
in view of their contribution to victory, they are justified in
expecting.

2.We are surprised to learn from our Charge d'Affaires, Moscow,
that the Foreign Secretary has expressed himself in favour of the
principle that the Four Powers should act practically en bloc
during the negotiations. He is reported to have compared the
Council of Foreign Ministers to a party caucus and to have added
that he would not dream of going back in Parliament on a policy
agreed on in caucus. The comparison is both revealing and
unconvincing. He is also reported to have said he personally was
quite satisfied with the procedure adopted at Paris.

3. We can only conclude that the objections aroused at the Paris
Conference by the prior undertaking of the Four Powers not to
accept any amendment to proposals on which the Council of Foreign
Ministers had reached previous agreement are not fully appreciated
by the Foreign Office. As we have repeatedly submitted, this
undertaking meant that many constructive proposals were not even
considered on their merits. It now appears that this undemocratic
principle is favoured by United Kingdom even during the
preparatory stages of the German settlement in, for example, the
information and Consultation Committee.

4. On the other hand, we are appreciative of the United States'
firm. support for the holding of a peace conference at which all
invited nations would have equal rights. It now appears that the
Secretary of State has gone much further towards a democratic
conference than any other members of the Council of Foreign
Ministers. Indeed, it has been reported to us that members of the
United Kingdom delegation in Moscow are not prepared to back him
to the full and hope that the functions of the conference will be
largely formal.

5. We had been advised that it was only the difficulty of carrying
the United States and France with the United Kingdom Government
that prevented them from supporting our objective of full
participation. We are being forced to the conclusion, as a result
of reports from Moscow, that in fact the United Kingdom is not
helping the Dominions to obtain the rights to which they are
entitled and that this is so despite misleading broadcast
propaganda suggesting the contrary.

6. It is necessary, therefore, to emphasise once again that our
requests for full participation are based on rights earned by our
contribution in the war and not on any privilege conferred by the
four powers. We strongly urge that the United Kingdom delegation
in Moscow be instructed to make a genuine stand for a fully
democratic procedure. It was never intended that the Council of
Foreign Ministers should make the peace. Mr. Byrnes, in a
broadcast of 5th October, 1945, said:

'At Berlin, it certainly was never intended that the three powers
present or the five powers constituting the Council should take
unto themselves the making of the final peace. The Berlin
declaration setting up the Council begins with the Statement "The
conference reached the following agreement for the establishment
of a Council of Foreign Ministers to do the necessary preparatory
work for the peace settlements'. The Council was not to make the
peace settlement but to do the necessary preparatory work for the
peace settlement'.

7. It was because of the unsatisfactory meeting in London that
Australia suggested as a last resort even a single British
Commonwealth delegation to the Council of Foreign Ministers. This
expedient has disadvantages but it would at any rate safeguard us
more than present Moscow procedures.