TNAG-1880-FCO40-2671-Student-demonstrations-and-internal-political-situation-in-C-1989 — Page 35

- 3 -

6.

In discussion of the points raised in the French paper all

delegations agreed that the USSR and Eastern Europe had to be

considered separately and that there were also differences among the

East European countries: Poland, Hungary v GDR, Czechoslovakia,

Romania, Bulgaria. Reforms, both economic and political, would lead

not only to internal problems but also to tensions between these

countries. Italy and Germany took an optimistic view of the

prospects of successful reform. The UK said that the only certainties were that developments would be unpredictable: we should

expect instability and take this into account in formulating our

policies. The Commission commented that the options put forward in

the French paper were too black and white. All delegations agreed

that the EC should take advantage of the opportunity to exert some influence. Spain supported by the UK and France stressed the need

for Western unity to do so effectively.

1.

The FRG stressed the strength of the Western position compared

to the USSR. National contacts with the Eastern bloc (academics,

journalists, etc) had been very fruitful. The EC should not seek to

coordinate such contacts but should continue to encourage them on a

national basis. The UK referred to the demonstrative effects of

Western European economic success and integration. Our first duty

was to continue to be successful and to provide a model of stability

and cooperation. We thought the CSCE process could be an important

instrument for change and might have some ideas to put forward for

political CBMs. The Netherlands warned against treating the East

European countries as though they were developing countries. The

Commission suggested that it was impossible to address the question

of levers without first considering the broader question of European Architecture. It would be difficult to write a paper as it would

either be so vague as to be valueless or so detailed as to fall

outside the remit of the working group. The Presidency ignored this

and stressed instead the need for the EC to demonstrate European

political as well economic reality to Eastern Europe. They

subsequently agreed to draft a short paper on European Architecture

for the next meeting.

АКЗААА