CAB80-25 — Page 280

Page 280

Page 280

234

7.

the paper across.

This use of the Allied Military Committee as a post office prostituted the body. It is true that as the war progressed more liberal thought began to prevail, but the rigid insistence on the fait accompli in the early days of the war and the resultant ill use of the Committee undoubtedly lowered its status in the eyes of the French High Command to an extent that when later it was, on occasions, desired that the Committee should function as originally intended the French Representatives found it extremely difficult to obtain proper briefing, and the ensuing discussions became unbalanced. This situation was not the fault of the French Representatives. Had we started to use the body correctly, I am fairly certain the French High Command would have co-operated fully.

Perhaps from the above list of difficulties it is possible to be constructive as regards the future, in case we again have an ally who will have the right to an equal say in the general direction and conduct of the war.

8. In any co-operation between Allied High Commands I think it must be clear that mutual consideration of any matter of military policy cannot just be left to the stage when it reaches the conference table at which the two High Commands are sitting. We have had more than one example during the last nine months of the difficulty of reaching an Allied decision when the matter was kept in water-tight compartments until its appearance before the joint High Commands.

9. Normally, some matter which will ultimately require Allied agreement will start off by being developed within

Even the General Staff orbit on one side or the other. before the purely British or ally's views on the matter have been fully developed it would always be advantageous to let the other side know that the subject was going to be brought up in the near future, in order that they too However, might give preliminary thought to the matter. undoubtedly the subject matter should be properly thought out an, say, the British side, and the purely British view This would be done within the developed and stabilised.

What is Chiefs of Staff organisation in the ordinary way. then undesirable is that the British view should be suddenly flung at the heads of the Allied High Command as a fait accompli. In these conditions it is much more difficult to give and take and to reach final agreement, particularly if the subject is one on which it might quite well be expected that the ally would have different views. There is much more chance of obtaining mutual agreement without undue disturbance and recrimination if at the earliest possible stage after one side have got their thoughts on paper, the subject is opened for discussion

By this means on the Staff plane between the two allies. the views and feelings of the other side are ventilated and can be noted. At the worst, if at this stage no compromise is achieved without having to give way on some important principle, the two High Commands will subsequently be in possession of the original general views of the other. They will each alone be able to give consideration to the differences of opinion and so,

-15-

Page 280

Page 280

Page 280Page 281