Memorandum by Sheila Murphy for Frank Aiken (Dublin)
'Note for the information of the Minister'

Ireland was not invited to participate in the Conference on the Pleven Plan for a European Army which has been sitting in Paris since last February. Invitations were issued only to member States of NATO and to Germany.

2. The Paris Conference has, of course, nothing to do with the Council of Europe though M. Pleven¹ avers that his Plan was inspired by a resolution calling for the creation of a European Army which was adopted by the Consultative Assembly of the Council in August, 1950. This resolution, which was submitted by Mr. Churchill, was opposed by the Irish representatives on account of Partition. In the course of his statement Mr. de Valera said:-

   ‘it is a mockery to talk about defending democracy and defending principles against aggression so long as the present situation in Ireland is permitted to last …. We are not free in Ireland … As long as that fact remains we cannot, no matter what international Assembly we are part of, go to our people and ask them to join in resisting aggression unless the aggression from which they suffer is also to be resisted.’

   Mr. MacEntee and Mr. Norton spoke in the same vein. The resolution duly came before the Committee of Ministers which pointed out that questions of national defence fall outside the scope of the Council of Europe and expressed the hope that the matter would be satisfactorily dealt with elsewhere.

3. At a later meeting (Nov. 1950) Mr. de Valera expressed the view that the Council of Europe should not be precluded from dealing with the question of defence which was the ‘most urgent of all matters which have to be considered.’ Last August, at a secret meeting of Ministers in Strasbourg Mr. Aiken indicated his approval in principle of the concept of a European Army.
4. In a recent Statement in the Consultative Assembly Mr. MacEntee said that Ireland would not range itself behind any proposal for a European Army, just as they did not join NATO. (Irish Press 29th Nov).
5. Though a certain measure of agreement has been reached at the Paris Conference, there are still at least two outstanding points on which there is a wide divergence of opinion, viz. (1) the question of a supra-national political authority and (2) the method of financing the Army. Even if agreement is eventually reached on these two points, it is extremely uncertain whether the Plan will be approved by either the French or German Parliaments.
6. Only six Governments have accepted the principle of integrating their forces in a European Army, viz, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Four others, viz. Britain, Denmark, Norway and Portugal, which are represented at the Paris Conference only by observers, have declared that, for the present at any rate, they could not contribute to such an Army. Sweden is not participating in the Conference, not being a member of NATO.
7. The decision that the European Army should be closely linked with NATO was officially announced by the Paris Conference last August and was warmly welcomed by the USA. The Conference hopes to issue its final report in time for consideration at the meeting of the NATO Council to be held in Lisbon in February.