364 Foreign Relations, 1958-1960, Volume IX



this could be discussed further by the Working Group. He also sug-
gested that paragraph (d) of the Geneva proposals might be modified to
avoid inclusion of the words "seriously affect the rights and interests
of
others". He felt that this would give the Soviets a pretext for continuous
attempts to intervene in West Berlin.
    The Secretary commented that the present suggested language was
better than that in the original bracketed portions of the Working Group
report. However, the use of "restored" or "established"
with reference
to Allied traffic, which was moving better now than it had some time
ago, had to be questioned. Lloyd said he agreed with this point. Von
Brentano cited statistics relating to harassment of German travelers, but
did not comment on the aspects of Allied travel.
    Couve observed that details of this sort were obviously not going to
be discussed at the Summit. The Heads of Government would have to
designate some other body to implement in detail the decisions on prin-
ciple which might be taken by them. Von Brentano said he knew that all
of these details could not be considered at the Summit. The object was to
obtain agreement on the goals for post-Summit discussion.
    The Secretary raised the possibility that the Soviets might utilize the
provisions for limitation of force levels, non-stationing of nuclear weap-
ons, and the ban on certain activities, in order to make claims to a right
of
inspection. Lloyd said that he thought the Western position on this
would be absolutely clear. We would not admit such a claim as having
any relevance to an agreement between Governments. Couve noted that
the Western proposal had envisaged a quadripartite commission to
serve as a disputes mechanism. Von Brentano stated that the Western
refusal at Geneva to put the question of troop levels in Berlin on a con-
tractual basis had been intended precisely to avoid giving the Soviets
any pretense for asserting inspection claims.
    With reference to "negotiating" at the Summit, the Secretary
noted
that the memorandum written by the President3 recalled his conversa-
tion with Khrushchev emphasizing that the Summit should be used for
purposes of discussion rather than negotiation. In response to the Secre-
tary's query, Couve said that the French had not thought of putting this
point into the communication to go from DeGaulle to Khrushchev re-
garding procedural arrangements. Lloyd said he hoped it had not been
included, since he could not understand the real difference between dis-
cussion and negotiation. The Secretary pointed out the essential differ-
ence is whether or not the details of agreements are worked out. Couve
observed that, in any event, no treaty was going to be made at the Sum-



    3Presumably a reference to the President's letter to Khrushchev transmitted
in
Document 110.