BRUSSELS TOMORROW (TUESDAY). LATER (SCE BELOW) A MESSAGE CONVEYING VANCE'S PERSONAL CONCERN WAS RELAYED TO ME.
2. HE SAID THAT THE IMPLICATIONS OF SUCH ACTION COULD NOT BE OVER-EMPHASISED. IF THE RESULT WAS, AS IT PROBABLY WOULD BE, EXTENSIVE QUOTA LEGISLATION IN THE CONGRESS, THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD BE IN VERY SERIOUS DIFFICULTIES ABOUT RESISTING IT. HE SAID THAT IF THE COMMUNITY DID NOT GO ALONG WITH RENEWAL TOMORROW, WE MIGHT NOT HAVE AN M.F.A. AT ALL. HE ADDED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD THE RESISTANCE TO RENEWING THE M.F.A. CAME NOT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE BUT FROM THE F.C.O.
3. MORE GENERALLY HE SAID THAT THE 0.E.C.D. FORECASTS FOR 1978 WERE VERY BLEAK, THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD BE DOING VERY WELL TO KEEP ITS HEAD ABOVE PROTECTIONIST WATERS HERE AND (SWITCHING METAPHORS) THAT REJECTION OF THE M.F.A. COULD BE THE SPARK WHICH IGNITED THE FOREST FIRE.
4. I THEN SPOKE TO NICOLL (UKREP BRUSSELS), WHO SUMMARISED THE
1 PRESENT POSITION FOR ME. I SPOKE AGAIN TO WOLFF, TELLING HIM THAT THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS HAD TODAY BEEN CONSIDERING THE COMMISSION'S REPORT ON THE OUTCOME OF ITS BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS WITH THOSE COUNTRIES WITH WHOM THE U.S. HAD ALREADY CONCLUDED BILATERAL AGREEMENTS. I SAID THAT THE U.K. POSITION WAS THAT THE RESULTS WERE INADEQUATE, BECAUSE THEY WOULD EXPOSE US TO MORE IMPORTS THAN WE HAD AGREED TO IN ESTABLISHING THE COMMISSION'S NEGOTIATING MANDATE. IT FOLLOWED THAT, IF WE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE OUTCOME OF THE BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS, THERE WAS NO POINT IN EXTENDING THE M.F.A.
5. 1 EXPLAINED THAT THIS EVENING (MONDAY) DISCUSSIONS WERE CONTINUING WITH THE COMMISSION TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT OUR NEEDS COULD BE MET SUFFICIENTLY FOR US TO VOTE POSITIVELY TOMORROW.
6. I ASSURED WOLFF THAT HIS REPRESENTATIONS WOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF MINISTERS.
7. LATER (192359Z) COOPER (STATE DEPARTMENT) CALLED ME TO RELAY A PERSONAL MESSAGE FROM VANCE, WHO WAS IN A MIDDLE-EAST'* MEETING, EMPHASISING HIS CONCERN ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE E.E.C. NOT RENEWING THE M.F.A. TOMORROW (TUESDAY).
JAY