This  leads  me  to  be  reserved  at  this  stage,  even  on  (b)  and  (c)  of  paragraph  18  on
Charles  Johnston’s  minute.  Would  it  be  practical  to  try  to  impose  even  that  sort  of
solution  without  having  another  referendum?  And  if  there  were  another  referendum,
  what  assurance  would  there  be  that  the  Saarlanders  would  approve  any  such
new  arrangement,  unless  the  leaders  of  the  German  parties  had  been  previously
squared?
When  you  come  back,  we  should  discuss  this  further,  and  it  will  of  course  be
helpful  if  you  get  any  indication  of  American  thinking.  But,  pending  what  happens
in  New  York,  I  am  not  myself  convinced  that  our  decision  should  be,  as  suggested
in  paragraph  24  on  the  minute,  that  we  should  thrash  out  with  the  Americans  a  programme
  which  should  be  broached  to  the  other  powers  concerned  immediately
after  the  referendum,  if  that  has  gone  against  the  Statute.  The  Americans  are  only
observers  at  the  Western  European  Union  Council,  when  the  Saar  is  discussed,  and
we  should  be  careful  of  W.E.U.  if  we  want  to  use  it  as  a  forum.  This  does  not  mean
that  we  should  not  keep  in  the  closest  touch  with  the  United  States,  and  ensure  their
tacit  backing,  at  least.  It  does  mean  that  a  joint  U.S.-U.K.  initiative  may  not  be  the
right  technique  for  handling  the  problem  until  we  are  clearer  in  our  minds  what  it  is
that  we  shall  want  to  do.
{Sewell}

Nr.  73b:  Bericht  des  britischen  Botschaftsrates  in  Bonn  Charles  H.  Johnston
an  das  britische  Außeministerium,  secret.
23.9.1955
National  Archives  -  Foreign  Office,  FO  371/118288/WG  1082/432,
The  Saar
The  Saar  Referendum  is  to  take  place  on  October  23.  The  prospects  of  the  Statute
being  accepted  have  receded  steadily  since  the  opening  of  the  three  months’  campaining
  period,  and  there  is  now,  at  best,  an  even  chance  of  its  rejection.  Unfortunately,
  most  electors  regard  the  Referendum  as  a  choice  between  France  and  Germany
  rather  than  as  a  choice  between  acceptance  and  rejection  of  the  Statute.  Our
representative  in  Strasbourg,  who  reported  in  August  that  the  Statute  would
probably  be  approved,  has  now  modified  his  view,  largely  because  the  Saar  C.D.U.
has  declared  against  the  Statute  and  the  pro-German  parties  have  formed  a  common
front  of  opposition.  The  members  of  the  European  Commission  supervising  the  Referendum
  in  Saarbrücken  generally  consider  that  if  the  Referendum  were  held  now
it  would  result  in  rejection  of  the  Statute.

480