Page 457 The United Kingdom attitude has so far been that the Turkish and Greek desire to be hitched to the North Atlantic Treaty could best be met by the compromise plan approved by the North Atlantic Council. This would, however, not be enough either to satisfy the Turks or to ensure full Turkish co-operation with the defence effort of the Western Powers, and we have therefore hoped to supplement it:
(a) by agreeing also to associate Turkey with the defence of the Middle East by close liaison with the British Middle East Command; and
(b) by persuading the United States to extend her present commitments towards Turkey by means of a unilateral guarantee supplementing the Treaties of Alliance which the French and ourselves have with
Turkey.
New Factors in the Situation
7.
It was becoming clear, even before the receipt of the United States Government's communication of 15th May, that this three- point programme (Turkish association with a N.A.T.O. Mediterranean Command, Turkish liaison with the British Middle East Command and a United States guarantee of Turkey) would be difficult to realise. In the first place, it has so far not been possible to reach agreement on the Command in the Mediterranean. Secondly, the Turks (acting apparently under the impression that they were meeting United States wishes) have disowned an agreement reached between General Robertson and the Turkish General Staff for defence co-operation with British Middle East Headquarters. Finally, it is now evident from their Aide Memoire that the United States Government are only prepared to extend a guarantee to Turkey (and Greece) in the context of N.A.T.O., i, e., by full Turkish (and Greek) membership of the North Atlantic Treaty.
8.
United States opinion has for some time been moving towards this solution. In a recent Senate debate and in the testimony of witnesses before the Joint Senate Committees, there was remarkable unanimity of opinion that Turkey and Greece (also Spain and possibly Yugoslavia) should be admitted to the Atlantic Pact. These views were expressed in strong terms by Generals Eisenhower, Bradley, Clay, Spaatz and George and by Admiral Sherman. General Eisenhower said: "You do not have to be a soldier to know the great value which would accrue to freedom within the United States by including these countries Spain, Turkey, Greece and Yugoslavia."' General Marshall was not opposed and even Senator Taft appeared to favour the inclusion of these countries. With this weight of influence in favour, American official opinion has now crystallised.
9.
Turkish opinion too has become increasingly anxious, and in a recent debate in the Turkish Parliament the Turkish Foreign Minister made a renewed appeal for full Turkish membership. The Turkish public are tending to believe that, whereas the United States (and even Italy) are prepared to sponsor Turkish membership, opposition springs from their best friends, the United Kingdom and France. His Majesty's Ambassador in Ankara has urged that the time has come for Turkey to be admitted to full membership.
10.
The Greek Government have similarly expressed their concern at the lack of progress in associating Greece with our defence system. They have not made any demand for full membership but have indicated that they expect it the Turf age admitted.
Page 457
-2-
346
United Kingdom objections to Turkish and Greek Membership
11.
Bagan 85&ctions to the admission of Turke Paga £587
full membership have been:
(i) It will require the consent of all the North Atlantic Treaty Powers,
some of whom, such as Norway and Denmark, may be reluctant to extend their commitments. The French are strongly opposed
to it and have instructed their Ambassador in Washington to represent their objections to the State Department. They have also urged us to support them in their opposition.
(ii) The extension of the North Atlantic Treaty to the Middle East,
which Turkish membership would involve, might provoke requests for membership from other Middle East countries,
(iii) The work of the various N.A.T.O. agencies would be
complicated by the addition of two more countries, particularly countries which differ in their social and political structure from the existing members of the Organisation.
(iv) By the admission of Turkey, the alliance would tend to lose its
"North Atlantic" character as an association of like-minded democratic nations with a common historical background, and to become an encircling alliance of countries bordering on the Soviet Union. Turkey is situated in a dangerous area and is a direct neighbour of Russia. At present there is no point (except northern Norway) at which the N.A.T.O, directly touches the Soviet frontiers. The admission of Turkey, by extending this point of contact, would increase the danger of a clash. It is mainly for this reason that the French Government are opposed to the idea.
Reasons for changing our attitude
12.
On the other hand, there are even stronger reasons for accepting the American proposal:
(i) It would extend American military commitments into the Eastern
Mediterranean area. This has always been our object, and the admission of Turkey and Greece to N.A.T.O. must be regarded as the price we have to pay for it if the United States will not extend their commitments in that area in any other way;
(ii) It would obtain for N.A.T.O. the use of the substantial and effective
Turkish armed forces and of Turkish bases;
(iii) The Americans, having once made up their mind, are likely to
exert pressure both on ourselves and on the smaller N.A.T. countries. This would be known to Greece and Turkey and it would be damaging to our relations with them if we were known to be standing out against their admission to N.A.T.O. when the Americans were pressing for it and when this was the only means by which they could obtain the American commitment which they so clearly need. We are not ourselves in a position to offer the Turks in the Middle East the material assurances of military support which would justify us in advising them to forego the advantages of N.A.T.O. membership;