§ 46. Mr. Healeyasked the Prime Minister to what extent it is Her Majesty's Government's policy to make agreement on the substance of major international problems a precondition to holding a Summit Conference.
§ The Prime MinisterHer Majesty's Government have never made it a condition that there should be agreement on matters of substance in discussions prior to summit talks, but only that there should be preparation likely to lead to a good conference at which some agreement might be reached.
§ Mr. HealeyWhilst welcoming the Prime Minister's definition of the British Government's position, may I ask whether this is also the position of Britain's allies in the matter? If it is, why on earth cannot the Western Powers accept Russian proposals for a Foreign Ministers' conference and cease this endless diplomatic minuet?
§ The Prime MinisterI think the position I have stated is the same as that which was stated by President Eisenhower in his Press conference on 5th March, and I am hopeful that it will be possible to make progress upon this basis.
§ Mr. GaitskellBut would the Prime Minister give us some idea of the circumstances which will determine our decision in this matter as to whether he thinks there is a real prospect of getting somewhere at the Summit Conference? Is there not some danger in our present attitude that either a decision is reached not to have a Summit Conference, because frankly we cannot get anywhere without knowing what is to happen at the Conference; or, alternatively, that hopes may be raised too high at the preliminary discussion if we are told after it that there is a prospect of getting somewhere and then we find there is not?
§ The Prime MinisterI appreciate the point put by the right hon. Gentleman and I have tried all the time to keep a balanced position between raising hopes too high or dashing them or being negative upon the whole matter. I hope this 222 approach is the right one to achieve just that purpose which the right hon. Gentleman has in mind.
§ Mr. ShinwellCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether any preliminary negotiations are proceeding at the present time? Is any diplomatic approach being made towards the Summit Conference?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman knows that a number of communications have been addressed by the Soviet Government to various Governments. I have still to make a further reply to one which was addressed to me. There are, of course, continual discussions between the Western Governments—if I may call them that—as to the best way of handling the matter in order to make progress upon the lines which seem to us best.
§ Mr. ShinwellI am not speaking about the formal communications, the letters, that have been addressed on both sides to either side. Has the right hon. Gentleman seen a report in the Press to the effect that in the United States the Russian Ambassador to Washington has been engaged in conversations with Mr. Dulles, and is that the nature of the preliminary negotiations?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. Of course, ambassadors come to see the Foreign Secretaries of all the various countries. I am not at all pessimistic about the outcome of this, and I think that the method by which we are approaching it is the most likely to lead to a result.
§ Mr. GaitskellAre discussions going on between the Soviet Government and the Western Governments at this moment on the matter?
§ The Prime MinisterNot formal discussions. There are, of course, always private communications, and just because they are private perhaps it would be better for me not to discuss them.
§ Mr. BevanWas not it suggested at the very start of these discussions that it would be much easier to hold a conference of Foreign Ministers first, and is not it taking almost as long to fix up a meeting between Foreign Ministers as it would be to summon the Summit Conference itself? When is it proposed to hold the conference between the Foreign Ministers?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is at present a difference of view as to what is to be the task either of preliminary negotiations through ambassadors or of the Foreign Secretaries. Up to now the Soviet Government appears to wish to confine the preparation merely to choosing the date, the place, the composition and the agenda. We feel that if the agenda is to be selective in the way most calculated to lead to some result, however limited, it is necessary to have some preliminary discussion of the character of the agenda, because that is the only way to find out the subjects which should be discussed at the start.
§ Mr. GaitskellBut is not the real difference between the Soviet Union and the Western Governments this, that whereas the Soviet Union is prepared to discuss the agenda at the preliminary conference, the Western Powers are insisting on what amounts to negotiation on specific points? Would not it be wiser in all the circumstances simply to confine the preliminary discussions to the four points mentioned by the Prime Minister?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir; because, first, rather strong positions have been taken up to try to rule out altogether certain subjects which seem to me to need further discussion; and, secondly, because I say with great seriousness that if, as I hope, we might make an advance—even a limited advance—it is important so to choose the agenda as to produce that result. Therefore, some discussion, not to reach agreement but to give a general idea as to how the agenda might best be chosen, seems to me to be an important part either of the ambassadors' or the Foreign Ministers' discussions.