European Diary, 1977-1981 Part 3

WEDNESDAY, 23 MARCH. Brussels, Luxembourg and Brussels.

Early start by avion taxi for Luxembourg. This was an unexpected visit to deal with the vote of censure on b.u.t.ter sales to Eastern Europe, which we had been confidently informed would not be taken. But this had proved (as so often with Parliament intelligence) to be quite mistaken. I arrived at the Parliament building just in time for a few quick words with Gundelach before the debate began at 10.00. Cointat, French Gaullist ex-Minister of Agriculture, opened, a Dane spoke for a minute and I then replied for about twenty minutes. After that there were four or five speeches from the members of the other groups and the whole thing was over, except for the vote, by just after 11.15.

The atmosphere was quite calm and the proceedings fairly satisfactory. Cointat's speech was not particularly effective, mine seemed to go fairly well. Broadly the line-up in favour of the censure was almost entirely French, plus a few Irish. Bordu,76 nominally on behalf of the whole Communist Group, announced they were going to support the vote of censure, but the Italian Communists quickly repudiated him. The vote did not take place until 1 o'clock, when I had gone back to Brussels, but then produced the very good result of 95 votes to 15 against the censure.

A Commission meeting from 3.30 to 7.15. Fairly routine business. High morale afterwards as a result of having got a number of things out of the way.

THURSDAY, 24 MARCH. Brussels and Rome.

Plane to Rome. Ha.s.sler Hotel by about 4.15. Stayed in the hotel from then until about 8.30, working hard on papers for the next day's European Council. Then with Ruggiero and Crispin to dine with my predecessor Malfatti77 at his flat in the old part of Rome. He had invited five or six of the editors of the main Italian papers.

FRIDAY, 25 MARCH. Rome.

Up early on a most beautiful morning. (The weather throughout this Rome visit, in contrast to the one of a month ago, could not have been better: continuous clear sky, temperature nearly 70 during the day but down to about 40 at night.) I worked over breakfast for about an hour and a half and then had a 9.30 briefing meeting with Ortoli and the four or five Directors-General we had with us.

Left at 11.30 to drive to the Campidoglio for the ceremony of the twentieth anniversary of the Treaty of Rome. We milled about for some time with the heads of government and Foreign Ministers, and then proceeded to the main, rather grand room, for the ceremony itself, which was quick, as there were speeches only from Leone, the President of the Republic, and a strikingly good one from the Communist Mayor of Rome. Then off to the Quirinale and the grand presidential luncheon. During the milling about there was a great deal of conversation on arrangements for the Summit. Giscard said nothing to me at this stage, but Schmidt implied that things were going to be all right for a compromise, and there was a good deal of muttering from den Uyl, Max van der Stoel, the Belgians, Thorn, Garret Fitzgerald, the Danes, all very excited about the issue, and feeling no certainty about the outcome.

The luncheon was a big affair for about one hundred and fifty. The heads of government and I were conducted into an inner room and then from there we were led out to shake hands with all the a.s.sembled, mainly Italian, guests. Rather to my surprise, Berlinguer78 was there, in the middle of a row, and was routinely introduced to me. As a result of all this, we did not get into lunch until 1.45 and it looked as though everything was set for a major Italian c.o.c.k-up, with the Council itself starting hours late. This could not have been more wrong. The lunch, which was very good for a banquet of this size, was served, four courses, in forty-five minutes flat, and this included brief speeches from Leone and from Callaghan (as President-in-office of the European Council). The whole thing was over by 2.30. This result was achieved by having a fleet of waiters-there must have been about a hundred-who advanced into the room like a swarm of bees as soon as each course was released.

Afterwards to the Palazzo Barberini for the Council itself. Great chaos in all the ante-rooms; difficulty in a.s.sembling my papers, though I was more successful than Schmidt, who didn't find his at all until the meeting had been going for some time. But he doesn't care much about briefs. On the way in, Giscard came up to me, full of apparent charm, calling me rather unusually for him by my Christian name, and asking had I got his letter, the four-and-a-half-page doc.u.ment which he thought it wise, most extraordinarily, to write me on the Wednesday, to which I replied rather coldly, 'Yes.' He then said, 'I do not understand why you are making such a fuss about presence at the Summit, my dear Roy. Your position in Europe is such that I would have thought this was a matter of complete unimportance to you.' I said it was a matter of very great importance, not personally but from the point of view of the Community. In any case, whatever my views, at least five countries felt very strongly about it. He then made an even more curious remark, saying, 'I never believe in arguing about matters which are unimportant, but when I see something as a matter of principle, then I never bend.'79 He was friendly, I was chilly throughout, and we then separated and moved in.

The European Council itself is in form a surprisingly satisfactory body, mainly because it is intimate. There were only twenty-five people in the room and we sat round a relatively small table, looking at most beautiful cartoons on the walls and ceiling. The twenty-five were made up of the nine heads of government, plus their Foreign Ministers, plus Ortoli and me from the Commission, plus four staff from the presidency-British Foreign Office staff, on this occasion, who were there for note-taking purposes-plus one huissier, who can be sent out with messages. This was a vast improvement on the huge gatherings which characterize the Council of Ministers, with up to three hundred people present in the huge room, talking from one end of the table to the other as though across an empty football pitch.

We met from 3.30 until 7.30 and talked mainly about the general economic position and then about the North/South dialogue. No Foreign Minister spoke throughout, nor did Ortoli. I intervened two or three times, fortunately being called by Callaghan to speak second, after den Uyl had spoken first on the general economic prospect, and therefore got into the water fairly quickly and easily. There was little discussion on the Summit issue, because although this was raised with a hint of menace by den Uyl, and supported by all the other five, it was agreed that it should be settled at dinner.

The meetings of the European Council, although intimate and restricted, are not at all secret. There are few in the room, but everybody goes out and tells great numbers of people exactly what they think has happened, and amongst their staffs there are those who in the course of duty immediately go and tell the press. It is a restricted meeting with full subsequent publicity, which is perhaps not a bad formula. At 7.30 I did a short debriefing session with my staff, who cl.u.s.ter around like a group on a rugby field when a player is changing his shorts.

To the Ha.s.sler about 7.45 for a very quick change (not of shorts) and then back to the Barberini for the official dinner an hour later. The dining arrangements were rather like those of a feudal court. Dinner, although of the same quality, I think, was provided for everybody, but in a series of rooms of declining hierarchical order. The nine heads of government and I dined in the inner one, then the Foreign Ministers and Ortoli, then the various officials present in a series of about three subsequent rooms. I sat at dinner between Andreotti and Cosgrave,80 the Irish Prime Minister. Cosgrave distinguished himself by eating more than almost any man I have ever seen, although his figure shows less sign than mine of this being his habit. The main course was piece de boeuf roti, over which I hesitated between taking one or two pieces, and took one, without a second helping. He took four for a first helping and three for a second helping, and followed this by two enormous helpings of ice-cream gateau and then went to sleep for most of the rest of the evening!

Talk at dinner was broadly divided into two halves. Giscard, who was sitting opposite Callaghan, mostly led the conversation down our side of the table, mainly in French with Tindemans81 and Andreotti and me, with Cosgrave concentrating on his food and talking no French at all. Schmidt, Callaghan, den Uyl, Thorn and Jrgensen82 were mostly talking together at the other end in English. After dinner, I suppose about 10.15, we got down to discussing the dreaded Summit. Den Uyl opened, speaking much worse English than usual for some reason or other. It was late in the evening and perhaps he was getting tired. Indeed at times it was difficult to tell whether he was speaking English or Dutch. Then, after one or two other interventions, Giscard spoke, handling himself rather well but making a highly contradictory statement, explaining why on no possible ground-this being supported by a whole series of specious arguments-could the French Government agree to the Commission being present, and then ending up by saying, which was no doubt what Schmidt had got out of him on the telephone, that he would agree to my being present for a session dealing with matters of Community competence. There was considerable argument around this, and it was made clear that it must be sessions and not a session.

I spoke only once for about five or seven minutes, and others chimed in in varying ways. Schmidt was not very strong, although he claimed to me afterwards that this was his deliberate tactic. He was trying to make it easier for Giscard, he said, having done his real work on the telephone, which was indeed I think true. Callaghan was not very strong either, but not too bad, and on one or two points slightly helped my position. The Little Five plus Italy were disappointing. Andreotti, who suffers grave linguistic disadvantage on these occasions-everyone else spoke in English at this stage of the discussion-said practically nothing. Tindemans was probably the best of the others. Thorn as usual was slightly irrelevant, and then he and Jrgensen left the room for quite a long time, going off I think to look for a loo, which was indeed extremely difficult to find without a walk of about three hundred yards in the Barberini, which was throughout its main disadvantage.

We went on round and round the subject in varying ways, but eventually arrived at the compromise solution, put forward in these terms: 'Present for discussions within Community competence at session or sessions'. It was made clear that there would be no question (1) of this being restricted just to one session, or (2) of my being asked to go out of the room at times and wait in the corridor outside.

Towards the end David Owen came in and said that the Foreign Ministers were bored and in a state of revolt outside, could they go to bed? They were told 'Yes', but in fact when we came out most of them were hanging about having last drinks. I then did a debriefing exercise and the press were informed indirectly of what had taken place. I returned to the Ha.s.sler reasonably satisfied. The outcome was certainly better than most people had expected and made it peculiarly difficult to see why Giscard had got himself into such a complicated position and why in particular he had taken the trouble to write me an elaborately drafted letter into which many hours of Elysee or Quai d'Orsay talent had clearly been poured such a short time ago.

SAt.u.r.dAY, 26 MARCH. Rome and Brussels.

Up early to another beautiful morning, but in a more relaxed mood than on the previous day. Some work over breakfast, a short briefing meeting, and then to the Barberini for the resumption of the Council at 10.00. Photographs outside on the terrace before we resumed, during which time the Dutch and the Belgians began to get very excited, saying that they were very worried that there had been a long meeting between Callaghan and Giscard that morning and they thought that the French were going to rat, with some degree of British connivance, on the agreement arrived at the night before. They proved to be wrong, but I awaited the acceptance of the agreed statement with some trepidation. But at this stage at any rate such concern proved unnecessary. The Council met from 10.00 until 12.15 and got through a good deal of business fairly expeditiously. Statements were approved on a Common Fund,83 North/South dialogue, the economic position, the Summit, j.a.panese trading relations, and we had a somewhat more substantial debate on steel. Callaghan was a good and efficient chairman.

One of the more extraordinary features of the morning was Genscher's behaviour. As, like other Foreign Ministers, he was not encouraged to speak, he spent the whole of the session engrossed in reading newspapers. He must have read every word in two days' issues of Die Welt, as well as getting on to several others. Quite frequently also he read them, not looking down at them on the table in front of him, but holding them up open before him, as though he were sitting at his own breakfast table. His performance reached a crescendo during a longish intervention of Schmidt -when Schmidt was arguing powerfully some point which he clearly regarded as of importance. Genscher was engrossed in his newspaper throughout, and then at a more than usually crucial point in Schmidt's discourse, decided to turn over the page, as a result of which Schmidt was practically enveloped in the folds of the Frankfurter Algemeine and was trying to address the Council through newsprint.

Schmidt showed remarkably little irritation at this, but it certainly did not point to very good Schmidt/Genscher relations.h.i.+ps, the more so as Genscher, during Schmidt's next intervention, got up and walked heavily and slowly, as is his way, out of the room. However, the Council survived these various vicissitudes and got through fairly satisfactorily. We then hung about for some time, debriefing and preparing for a press conference which I was to give jointly with Callaghan at 1.00. This was a relatively easy and short performance.

While I was sitting in my car in the courtyard of the Barberini waiting to leave, Nanteuil, the French Permanent Representative, approached the car, half-laughing in a slightly embarra.s.sed way. I had my window about a third down and went to unwind it right down, but by some misfortune (it might easily have created a major diplomatic incident) succeeded in winding it bang up in his face. However, he surmounted this and said: 'I am afraid this is rather a farce, but I have to ask you whether you still want the original of that letter which the President of the Republic wrote to you on Wednesday. It is rather out of date now, so perhaps you don't want it.' I said, 'Mais, si. C'est un doc.u.ment historique.'

We both laughed a certain amount over this, and I give Nanteuil rather good marks for his handling of the embarra.s.sment. Then, poor man, he had to put his attache case on the back of the car and try, as is always difficult in such circ.u.mstances, to find this heavily embossed doc.u.ment and hand it over to me. Fortified by this, we set off for a celebratory lunch at Pa.s.setto until we left to drive at great speed to the airport. We were in the air barely thirty minutes after leaving the restaurant. Why we wanted to get back so early I cannot think, for it was a perfect day in Rome and a horrible evening in Brussels.

TUESDAY, 29 MARCH. Brussels.

Into the office fairly early, to be photographed beside the Rover, which was in a state of almost total collapse and was about to go back to England for various major overhauls.84 Nonetheless, ironically, British Leyland thought it was a good thing to have me photographed outside the Berlaymont with it. It had to be pushed into position!

FRIDAY, 1 APRIL. Brussels.

Commission meeting at 10.00 on Mediterranean agriculture. It opened in an extremely disagreeable atmosphere with the French in particular, but also to some extent Davignon and the Italians-Giolitti more than Natali-complaining of the statement (about a new aspect of the old b.u.t.ter exports row) which had been put out in the name of myself and Gundelach. Gundelach gave an explanation which improved things a good deal, and then he went off and did a reasonably satisfactory press conference. But it looked at one time as though we were set right back into the middle of another major row which was going to be quite as difficult as the February one. This did not, however, materialize despite the fact that at the end of the Commission meeting I had Nanteuil muttering dark threats from Paris down the telephone. I did not take these too seriously but I was depressed by the Commission meeting, both because of the disagreeable atmosphere at the beginning and also because of a very unsatisfactory discussion of Mediterranean agriculture.

MONDAY, 4 APRIL. Brussels.

A meeting with Bob McNamara,85 accompanied by William Clark,86 at 12.30, and took them home to lunch. Apart from Jennifer and Thea Elliott87 (staying), we had a Commission lunch for him, including Ortoli, Davignon and Cheysson. McNamara as always was both nice and impressive. He spoke very well across the table after lunch and made a considerable impression on both Ortoli and Davignon. Cheysson already knew him well.

THURSDAY, 7 APRIL. London.

Went with Jennifer to see a rather pretty little house in Addison Avenue as a possible alternative to Ladbroke Square. Then to the British Council to look at some good pictures which they were offering to lend me for my room in Brussels. We got a Sutherland, a Matthew Smith, a Sickert and also one or two possible large abstracts.

Then to Downing Street for three-quarters of an hour with Callaghan, who was in what I would describe as his bluff bullying mood. We talked perfectly friendlily for some time. Then I spoke to him about the need to unravel the really very tight knots tied by the breakdown of the Agricultural Council, particularly if Britain wanted JET,88 or indeed if he wanted to have any success during the remaining three months of the British presidency of the Council of Ministers. He then raised without warning some new difficulties about the Summit, on which the French were going on being endlessly tiresome, and suggesting a rather unsatisfactory arrangement by which I did not go to the first dinner, did not go to the Sat.u.r.day session, and went only to the large Buckingham Palace dinner on Sat.u.r.day night and to the Sunday sessions. Apparently the French with almost unbelievable impertinence were trying to say that the British must exclude me from lunch on the Sunday. Callaghan, I thought, was pretty weak in dealing with all this, and it wasn't a very satisfactory conclusion to the interview.

SAt.u.r.dAY, 9 APRIL. East Hendred.

Large lunch party with, amongst others, Nicko Henderson. Nicko told me that Francois-Poncet,89 Secretary-General at the Elysee, had been on to him on either Tuesday or Wednesday about the vital issue of my non-presence at the preliminary dinner for the Summit on the Friday evening, and also the Sat.u.r.day sessions, Giscard still fighting a hard rearguard action. He also said that throughout the British had been basically just as difficult as the French and that he was amazed that, given this essential weakness of position, I had got as far as I had at Rome.

SUNDAY, 10 APRIL. East Hendred.

Easter church from 10.15 to 11.15, then croquet with Edward.90 Family lunch, followed by a visit from the David Owens from 2.15 to 4.15. It was very good of them to have come, because it could hardly have been convenient, for they had driven up from Plymouth that morning and David was seeing Nkomo at 5.30 before preparing to fly to Africa that evening. I had a good talk with him, although in a way it does now remind me slightly of talking to Tony (Crosland) in the last four or five years. There is a certain reticence on both sides. We got on to the subject of the Summit towards the end, where he was rather anxious to justify himself and to say that he had done the best that he possibly could, although explaining that Giscard was making a lot of new difficulties. He also said that Callaghan, who had started by being very bad on this point, as bad as Schmidt and Giscard -I said, 'Not fair to say that Schmidt was as bad as the other two'was in his view becoming steadily better. However, it was quite a useful conversation, although I hate being a demandeur with David.

SUNDAY, 17 APRIL. East Hendred and Was.h.i.+ngton.

1.05 Pan-American plane to Was.h.i.+ngton, which, amazingly, was in the air at 1.15. Quick and agreeable flight. Slightly irritating not to be able to go by Concorde, a plane which never seems to go from the right place at the right time. I was considerably amused to discover on the plane a large party of British MPs, about ten in all, led by Nicholas Ridley and Brian Sedgemore, travelling first-cla.s.s of course, who, when asked what they were doing, said they were members of the House of Commons Public Expenditure Committee who were going to Was.h.i.+ngton to study methods of effective control and saving. I hope they don't spend as much as they save.

We were met by Fernand Spaak, our Amba.s.sador, Peter Rams-botham, the British Amba.s.sador, and American protocol people. We drove into Was.h.i.+ngton on a most beautiful spring afternoon, temperature about 75, sky cloudless, all the trees out and the atmosphere still and fresh. We were installed in Blair House, which I had only visited once before when Joe Fowler91 gave me a dinner there in 1968. It is splendidly furnished with a lot of good early American furniture, as well as mementoes of Presidents. We had a huge suite with a library, a drawing room, two bedrooms and, strangely, three bathrooms. My bedroom was a sort of Eisenhower memorial room. However, in a curious way, the practical amenities were by no means up to the splendour. The main disadvantage was that no window could be opened, for security reasons I suppose.92 As a result we were unable to establish contact with the sparkling atmosphere outside and had throughout rather stuffy air-conditioning. My bathroom also was remarkably inconvenient and I never managed to get any hot water to come out of the bath taps. Equally, the rather beautiful quite large paved garden at the back was ruined as a place to sit or even walk in by the sound of one of the noisiest air-conditioning machines ever heard. It was like being in a small forge.

MONDAY, 18 APRIL. Was.h.i.+ngton.

This was the crucial central day of the visit. I awoke inevitably very early, and did a good deal of further work on briefs between 6.10 and 9.30. A most beautiful morning again and Jennifer and I walked for a mile. Then left at 11.25 in a cavalcade of cars for the one-minute drive to the White House. Into the Cabinet Room, where we were greeted by Mondale and Vance,93 as well as Brzezinski* and one or two other people. Then I was taken into the Oval Room for a private talk with Carter. He and I stood with our backs to the fireplace for photographs, while the following extraordinary exchange took place: He said, 'I expect you know this room well. Have you been here often before?' I said, 'Yes, I think I have seen four of your predecessors here.' He very quickly said, 'That means you start with Kennedy, does it?' So I said, 'Yes, though I also met both Truman and Eisenhower, though neither when they were in office and therefore not in this room.' I then added, conversationally, 'But, to my great regret, I never set eyes upon Roosevelt. Did you, Mr President, by chance see him when you were a boy?'

'See him,' said Carter incredulously. 'I have never seen any Democratic President. I never saw Kennedy. I never saw Lyndon Johnson [astonis.h.i.+ng]. I saw Nixon, and I both saw and talked to Ford of course, and that's all. You see I am very new to this scene of Was.h.i.+ngton politics.' This he said without p.r.i.c.kliness or chippiness or bitterness, simply as a matter of fact of which he was half but not excessively proud. It was quite different from the aggressive.'defensive way in which Lyndon Johnson would have reacted had one got on to an a.n.a.logous conversation with him about the Kennedy years.

After this we sat down as I had said that I wanted to have a word or two alone with him, discussed how he would like to take the agenda in the formal meeting, and told him that I was concerned about relations between Germany and America, giving him a very brief description of my conversation with Schmidt, and said that I was sure Schmidt would like to improve relations and that I thought this could be one very useful outcome of the Summit. Carter responded easily, with interest and warmth.

We then proceeded to the Cabinet Room and settled down for our meeting across the table. There was a total of fifteen or sixteen people in the room, a few more on their side than ours, but not many. Carter conducted the meeting well. It lasted about fifty minutes and I do not suppose that he spoke for more than ten minutes of the time himself. I must have spoken for a total of thirty minutes at least, mainly because I was the only person who spoke on our side and also because a lot of questions were put to me. On their side interventions were made by Vance and, once, by Brzezinski, and too frequently by Henry Owen,94 the loquacious Brookings Inst.i.tute man, who is now in charge of the preparatory work for the Summit.

The atmosphere was very friendly, the Americans making it absolutely clear how keen they were to work closely with us and what nonsense they thought it that we were being excluded from the preparatory meetings for the Summit. Carter gave the impression of being well structured both physically and mentally. He has a neat body, in spite of his odd face, holds himself well, moves compactly, and conducted a tight meeting.

After it was over we went to the State Department, I riding with Vance in his car, and discussing on the way a mixture of gossipy items and subjects of real importance. Lunch, again about eight a side. Blumenthal, Strauss and Cooper95 were there, the first two not having been present at the White House. Quite a good, general discussion at lunch. After lunch half an hour's talk with Vance alone in his room. I decided to repeat to him what I had said to the President about Schmidt. I think that he is fairly cool about the French, although he is anxious to have tolerable relations.

He expressed great admiration and affection for David Owen, said that he got on very well with Genscher, but found Guiringaud by comparison stiff, rigid and very unwilling to go in any way outside his instructions or to engage in a relaxed conversation. I said he was lucky not to have had to deal with Sauvagnargues.96 He also agreed that Carter and Schmidt, certainly if they set themselves to it, would get on thoroughly well together, but that relations between Carter and Giscard were likely to be a good deal more difficult. Vance also told me, almost with incredulity, although I heard it with no such incredulity, that they had had semi-official protests from the French Government about having very briefly received Michel Rocard, the number two man in the French Socialist Party, at the State Department.

After this meeting Vance escorted me down to the front of the State Department and I returned to Blair House for a brief pause before a meeting at 3.30 with Robert Strauss, the new Special Trade Representative, who called upon me there. Quite a good meeting with him. He, as at lunch, was very anxious to recall our previous encounters and to establish a relations.h.i.+p of personal friends.h.i.+p, and, although obviously a political 'pro', should be more than tolerable to deal with on the personal level. He does not know much about Multinational Trade Negotiations97 yet (nor do I) but he has people who do and will probably pick the subject up quite quickly. He is clearly determined to make a personal impact in this field, which means pus.h.i.+ng the MTNs to a successful conclusion. He took the Trade job rather reluctantly but having done so will want to make the most of it.

I then set off for a more formal meeting, with more people present, with Blumenthal at the Treasury. Blumenthal was accompanied by his Under-Secretaries, Solomon and Bergsten, and chose to talk a lot about North/South CIEC (Conference for International Economic Cooperation) matters. Despite their choice of subject they were not wholly well-informed, certainly not Blumenthal, who had not much applied his mind to these matters, and nor on one point was Solomon, who had. They both, however, gave the impression of being quite impressive intellectually, and Blumenthal was very good on trade matters, though knowing less about monetary affairs.

Back at Blair House I had an hour's visit from Teddy Kennedy which was partly politics and partly gossip. He looked very well and seemed perfectly reconciled to his new role of being a major senator, but not a figure with any likely immediate presidential prospect. I asked him if he still managed to find time for instance to do much speaking around the country, and he said, 'No, there isn't much point, and as a matter of fact I don't now get many invitations.' He was reasonably friendly towards Carter, not overboard about him, but not bitterly, irresistibly critical like George McGovern.

That evening we gave our dinner party for about forty at Blair House. The Vances came, and also the Charles Schultzes (Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers), as well as some other Government figures, Richard Cooper, etc. It was difficult, however, to get people from Congress and of the three or four legislative notables whom we asked, I think that only Rhodes, the Republican Leader in the House, turned up. However, a lot of old friends, like Harrimans,98 Bruces,99 McNamaras, Arthur Schlesingers,100 came with apparent alacrity. The food was not very good and the drink (provided by the house) entirely American. David Bruce, when we lunched with him the next day, retaliated by giving us Haut-Brion 1945!

TUESDAY, 19 APRIL. Was.h.i.+ngton and Chicago.

A walk from 7.15 to 8.00. Then back to Blair House for a Voice of America programme followed by a meeting with Henry Owen on the preparatory work for the Summit. Then a press conference at 11.30, followed by one or two individual interviews and the Bruces' lunch with Joe Alsop101 and Ben Bradlee (editor of the Was.h.i.+ngton Post) at 1.15.

At 2.30 I went to see Tip O'Neill, Speaker of the House, who in some ways is a caricature of a Boston Democratic politician, but at the same time quite different from his equally Bostonian predecessor, McCormack. He was for instance extremely impressed when he discovered that I had a Harvard honorary degreeit must be said that his const.i.tuency embraces Cambridge-whereas McCormack would have been totally unmoved by that and thought it a typical bit of eastern establishment international frippery.

Then a good meeting with a selection from the Senate Foreign Affairs and Finance Committees. About twelve senators present, mostly important ones. Hubert Humphrey presided, his appearance having changed most dramatically since his illness. He now looks like a death head mask, shrunken, but at the same time seemed for the moment fit and vigorous. Also Russell Long, Frank Church, Abe Ribicoff, Jack Javits, George McGovern and a number of others I knew less well. We talked around for about an hour or so. Then from there to the British Emba.s.sy where I did a debriefing with the amba.s.sadors of the Nine, and direct from there to the 7.30 plane to Chicago, arriving in a thunderstorm, with a slow drive in from O'Hare to the Whitehall Hotel, the Drake being full.

WEDNESDAY, 20 APRIL. Chicago and New York.

Lunch speech to the Council on Foreign Relations. Only about a hundred people, almost entirely male and business, but a fairly receptive audience who produced a very good question session afterwards. The speech itself was rather long, about thirty-five to forty minutes, but also went quite well despite (1) my cold and (2) a curious indifference on the part of those present to my reference to Adlai Stevenson, who had been chairman of the Council for six years in the thirties. Afterwards a quick visit to the Art Inst.i.tute opposite, which was as spectacular as I had remembered it, then back to the hotel, followed by a tedious one-and-a-quarter-hour drive to O'Hare. This, however, was nothing compared with the tedium at O'Hare itself, which really is the major disadvantage of the otherwise splendid city of Chicago. We moved off from the terminal about forty minutes late and then proceeded to sit on the ground for another one and three-quarter hours, so that when we got to New York we were two and a half hours late. To the Plaza Hotel.

THURSDAY, 21 APRIL. New York.

Recorded an ABC breakfast programme with John Lindsay,102 whom I was pleased to see again. A call on Waldheim at the UN at noon. Having heard very little in his favour, I found him somewhat more impressive than I had expected. He was not very interested in or knowledgeable about economic affairs, which he left to his French deputy who was present, but he talked well about political issues like Cyprus, Southern Africa and the Middle East.

Lunch with Newsweek at the Century Club, typical of all these American editorial luncheons, in that six or seven people do nothing but ask questions and therefore do not, I think, get nearly as much out of one as they might do if they contributed rather more to the conversation themselves. Afterwards to the office of the Communities' Mission to the UN for a debriefing of the amba.s.sadors of the Nine to the UN. Then our dinner which Arthur Schlesinger had organized in the new Windows on the World restaurant on the 107th floor of the equally new Trade Building. The Mac Bundys103 and Betty (Lauren) Bacall epitomized the guests.

FRIDAY, 22 APRIL. New York and East Hendred.

Day plane to London, and East Hendred by 11 p.m.

WEDNESDAY, 27 APRIL. Brussels.

Commission for five and a quarter hours. Quite long, a lot of business transacted but all rather easy, a gentle stream meandering in an agreeable way through a rather flat landscape. Lunch in the middle for Mountbatten,104 with Tindemans and Simonet as Belgian guests, Plaja,105 the Italian Permanent Representative, and Michael Jenkins. Mountbatten talked well in set pieces. He had to leave at half past two and I then stayed another half hour or so listening to Tindemans and Simonet warily purring at each other. It was a crucial day for the formation of the new Belgian Government. Tindemans very much wanted the Socialists, and particularly Simonet, in the Government, and Simonet himself very much wanted to be in the Government. The points at issue were that Tindemans wanted Simonet to be Minister of Finance, while Simonet wanted to be Foreign Minister, and that Tindemans wanted the Socialists and the Liberals to come into a grand coalition and the Socialists wanted to keep the Liberals out and have the Communal parties in their place.

THURSDAY, 28 APRIL. Brussels.

At 12.45 to the COREPER meeting in the Charlemagne building where we marched in and sat down facing the chairman, flanked by the other amba.s.sadors, as is the routine, and Donald Maitland read out their report on the agenda for the next meeting of the Council. I deliberately made practically no comment on this and then said to him afterwards that, while I valued the luncheons and his calls upon me, I thought that these meetings were absolutely useless and I proposed not to go to them in future. He said he quite agreed, although he hoped very much that the luncheons would go on. This one was enjoyable, as I gave them at their request a Was.h.i.+ngton briefing and was able to have quite a good tease of both Maitland and Nanteuil about the ploys of their respective governments in trying to keep us out of the Summit preparatory meetings and trying to keep away from us doc.u.ments which the Americans had been only too pleased to show us.

FRIDAY, 29 APRIL. Brussels.

I received the King of the Belgians for his somewhat postponed visit to the Commission at 11.30. We had a Commission meeting with him for about one and a quarter hours, in which I introduced all the Commissioners to him, described what they each did and said a few words of welcome. I then asked first Haferkamp and then Cheysson to introduce a slightly but not excessively artificial discussion about North/South relations, followed by Davignon on the problems of the steel industry. After Davignon, Vouel, Tugendhat and Giolitti spoke. Everybody did rather well; perhaps particularly the King who asked some very sensible questions in his diffident way and seemed thoroughly interested. Then a lunch, at which I talked half to him bilaterally and then widened the discussion for a further talk about a whole range of Community issues. We broke up at about 3.00 after a surprisingly successful and worthwhile occasion.

At 4.30, Hallstein,106 the doyen of ex-Presidents, came in for an hour. I went down to meet him at the front door. He was physically feeble, so that it took about five minutes to walk from the top of the lift to my room, and even longer for me to walk with him at the end from my room to Emile Noel's room. But he seemed thoroughly bright and alive in mind and was friendly and informative to talk to. I tried to discover how different things were in his day and got some impression. The Commission was a smaller, more intimate, tauter body. He was in the habit, he said, of addressing all the staff from the level of A2 (Director) and above after each important event, which might be two or three times a year. The Council obviously worked somewhat better and more intimately. The Parliament, he claimed, played almost as great a part in the life of the Commission as is the case now, although I remain sceptical about this. He never worked in the Berlaymont and clearly and rightly hated it as a building.

SAt.u.r.dAY, 30 APRIL. Brussels.

Perhaps the first real spring day. Drove via Ghent to Breskens where we took the ferry across to Vlissingen and through Middelburg to Veere, where we lunched sitting at the window in an old tower looking at an inlet of the sea speckled with sailing boats on very sparkling water. Then another walk along the dikes after lunch and then back by a different, further inland ferry and through St Niklaas and into Brussels by 6.30.

MONDAY, 2 MAY. Brussels.

A Mitterrand107 visit at 11.30. Cheysson had approached me four or five weeks earlier and said that Mitterrand would like to visit the Commission with one or two of his Socialist collaborators; would this be agreeable to me, and would I give him lunch? I said, 'Yes, certainly, I would be thoroughly glad to see him, just as I would be to see Mrs Thatcher or Kohl.' Cheysson then asked me to keep the matter confidential until he had taken further soundings with Mitterrand, and I did not therefore speak to Ortoli or anyone else. But while I was away over Easter and in the United States, the Cheysson cabinet, merely discovering from my office that I would be in Brussels and free, and without consulting me, arranged the date of 2 May.

When we were informed of this in the United States I immediately sent Michael Jenkins to inform Ortoli, whose reaction was not enthusiastic but not violently hostile either. I then saw Ortoli when I got back and explained the position to him. He was still rather reserved about it but said it was much too late to put it off; he did not think it would do great damage (in Paris); we should try to play it in as low a key as possible. This indeed was what I endeavoured to do without erring on the side of discourtesy. I did not give Mitterrand anything like head of government treatment. I did not go down and meet him. I received him in what is normally my dining room, and did not invite photographs, although he came accompanied by a great barrage of press and television cameras. I then had an hour and a quarter's meeting with him at which Natali, Haferkamp and Cheysson were present throughout, with Davignon and Gundelach joining us in the course of the meeting. I had been particularly anxious that there should be a political balance of Commissioners and had therefore swollen the numbers by inviting Natali and Davignon as Christian Democrats. Gundelach was not on the original list, but Cheysson had particularly asked for him to come.

The meeting started slightly stickilyMitterrand is not the easiest man to deal withbut improved as it went along. He made a good, clear statement about the French Socialists' commitment to direct elections and their opposition to the Gaullist/Communist view that these should be accompanied by a commitment to no further extension of the powers of the Parliament. On other matters, however, he appeared fairly unsatisfactory. He was very reserved about enlargement, accepting without enthusiasm the Portuguese application, was firmly opposed to Spain, and disinclined to accept that we were irreversibly down the road with Greece. He made a lot of anti-American and protectionist remarks, and generally gave the impression of a complete Gaullist of the Left. He did, however, express himself firmly in favour, no doubt partly on anti-Giscard grounds, of the Community's presence at all parts of the Summit.

At lunch afterwards nearly all the other Commissioners turned upI couldn't easily prevent their doing so as they all wished to meet Mitterrand. Ortoli, who had hovered and havered, eventually decided to turn up, and behaved thoroughly graciously. At the meal there was partly bilateral conversation between Mitterrand and me, during which I found him more easy and agreeable than during any previous encounter. He talked frankly and sensibly about his own position, saying two things in particular. (1) He thought that short of some international upheaval, i.e. some uprising in Eastern Europe or some great Yugoslav crisis, it was as certain as could be that the Left would win in France next spring and that he would then have to be asked to and would form a government under Giscard. (2) So far as 1981 was concerned, he expressed the view, rather to my surprise, that he might well be too old and it would therefore be a mistake to a.s.sume that the 1981 presidential election would take the form of a contest between him and Chirac108 At the end of lunch I avoided speeches by turning the conversation into a general discussion. He left soon after 3.00 and I said goodbye to him at the top of the lift shaft.109 TUESDAY, 3 MAY. Brussels.

Foreign Affairs Council with a special restricted session on the Summit. David Owen told me privately beforehand that the final proposition from London was that I should be excluded from all the Sat.u.r.day sessions which would deal with the general economic matters in the morning and then with non-proliferation in the afternoon. This was not satisfactory, but not a great surprise. When it was announced, all the Little Five expressed themselves very strongly against the arrangement. The Italians and the Germans said nothing and Guiringaud kept his head down. I argued the complete illogicality of the division. This part of the meeting was fairly but not very bad-tempered. David summed up in an embarra.s.sed way saying that while it was a compromise it was bound, like all compromises, to be slightly untidy, and somewhat self-pityingly complained that others did not show sufficient sympathy for the extremely difficult position in which the British presidency had been placed.

I was besieged by British pressmen on the way out, who regarded this as a setback from the Rome position. But it was not really much worse than I had expected and I therefore tried to play it fairly cool. Then to a state dinner given by the King of the Belgians in the Palais de Bruxelles for Houphouet-Boigny (President of Cote d'Ivoire). The dinner itself, for about two hundred people, was very grand, in a splendid room, with all the style of Buckingham Palace. I sat between Tindemans, with whom I had an extremely interesting and agreeable general conversation, and Madame De Clercq, the wife of the Finance Minister, herself a fairly leading lawyer in Ghent.

WEDNESDAY, 4 MAY. Brussels and Luxembourg.

Lunch at home for Emanuele Gazzo, the remarkable and wise editor of Agence Europe, a cyclostyled sheet which comes out every day in four languages and contains a great deal of detail about what goes on in the Commission, as well as some very sensible leading articles, and has considerable influence in Brussels.

Then by train to Luxembourg for the fourth of my inaugural visits. An hour with Thorn in his office before dinner. He had expressed himself very strongly at the Council the day before and repeated this to the press, coining a good phrase on my Sat.u.r.day exclusion. The Community isn't only a Community for Sundays,' he announced. Privately, however, his view was that we had not done too badly even though he held the position of the French and the British to be fairly intolerable.

I asked him about the British presidency and Britain's general standing in Europe. He said the presidency was going fairly badly and that the sense of disillusion was considerable. Perhaps unfairly, they put up with things from the French they wouldn't put up with from the British because they were used to the French and they were used to playing a tiresome game with them, and they could have one country doing this but they could not have two. Furthermore they had thought that when the British came in, while we would not bring great economic strength or wealth-but this they did not mind; indeed to some extent, in comparison with the past when we were much the richest country in Europe, they rather liked it-they had thought that we would bring a democratic infusion, and therefore our hesitancy over direct elections was a mystifying disappointment. And they had also thought that we would bring not so much a sense of efficiency, but a sense of fair play to our chairing of the various Councils, and therefore our handling of the Agricultural Council and of the Research Council had also been damaging.

THURSDAY, 5 MAY. Luxembourg and Brussels.

I awoke with some sort of allergy, producing monstrous weals. There was no particular evidence that I felt unwell, although obviously rather apprehensive (what a farce if I could not go to the Summit after all!). I rang (Dr) Ann Phillips in Brussels and consulted her, she taking a reasonably rea.s.suring view, and also made tentative soundings with Antony and Anne Acland,110 with whom we were due to have a drink at 12.30, about the possibility of getting a doctor. One and a half hours' meeting with about half the Luxembourg Government, and then to the Grand Ducal Palace for an audience with the Grand Duke and the Grand d.u.c.h.ess.

They were thoroughly agreeable-he charming, she sharper, sister of the King of the Belgians, but very unlike Baudouin -despite the fact that I had refused their invitation to dinner that evening on the thoroughly good grounds, which they appeared completely to understand, that I had to get back to Brussels and prepare for the Summit. The conversation essentially took the form of their asking me what I had thought of Carter and my describing this rather anecdotally, and then going on to the same thing at their prompting about Mitterrand, and to some sort of general discussion about Euro-Communism and the difference between the position and att.i.tude of the Communist Party in France and Italy. The atmosphere of the Court was, curiously, slightly more formal and more like our own than the monarchies of Belgium and Holland.

Lunch with Thorn and a large collection of Luxembourgeois notables-at a late nineteenth-century chateau (Senningen) in rather pretty woods about five miles out. During lunch it became pretty obvious to me that the improvement of my allergy was not being sustained. Nevertheless to a press conference with Thorn, a briefing of the amba.s.sadors of the Nine and then to the new Jean Monnet building for an opening ceremony with the Grand Duke and d.u.c.h.ess and speeches from Thorn, the Chairman of the Comite des Anciens, i.e. those who had been there with Monnet from the beginning, and me.

Then at 7.15 to see Dr Schau, who was said to be the best doctor in Luxembourg. He was agreeable, competent and not at all rea.s.suring. He said it was a very bad allergy and he was by no means sure I would be all right for the Summit, which was of course beginning to obsess me. It would be a superb piece of irony, and indeed bathos, if, after all the fuss, I were ill and unable to be present for that reason. He then gave me two injections and suggested I take anti-histamine tablets as well. Michael Jenkins and I then drove to Brussels, where things seemed worse again and I went to bed in great gloom.

FRIDAY, 6 MAY. Brussels and London.

I woke to find that a miracle had occurred and that there was not a single trace left of the tribulations of yesterday. Received Houphouet-Boigny at 11.30 and into the Commission for one of our routine formal meetings, before taking him for a quick lunch at Val d.u.c.h.esse. Speeches on both occasions. He is an agreeable, able, moderate, little man, much more so than Mobutu, but at the same time not easy to do a French conversational dance with. He was reasonably forthcoming, with none of Mobutu's pretence of being a demi-G.o.d, but showed a curious self-centredness, a lack of interest in anything to do with one's own life, a complete absence of conversational initiative.

Plane to London and via Ladbroke Square to the Downing Street dinner, at which we had been requested to arrive at 7.48 (!) and which we did exactly punctually, although it seemed a little ludicrous.

I was received by Callaghan and then went upstairs to find David Owen and Denis Healey. I was of course asked to be the first-as the most junior-of the delegations to arrive. The others then came in fairly thick and fast and I was greeted extremely warmly by Carter and Vance and Blumenthal; by Trudeau,111 whom I had not seen for about eight years; by Schmidt; by Andreotti; by the j.a.panese-I had forgotten that f.u.kuda, the Prime Minister, had been Finance Minister when I was his opposite number in the late sixties; and indeed perfectly courteously by Guiringaud, who was the only French representative present.

On arrival, however, I had been far from pleased to be told that there were three tables and that I was to sit, not at the heads of delegation table, not indeed even at the Foreign Ministers' table (although this perhaps did not matter), but at the Finance Ministers' table. This was a gratuitous piece of nonsense by Callaghan. Having lost Giscard for his dinner-and Giscard, incidentally, that morning had told Le Monde that it was my presence which was preventing him from coming-the least he could have done was to play the thing with some style.

SAt.u.r.dAY, 7 MAY. London.

Inevitably a frustrating day of waiting, heel-kicking and over-febrile preparation at home in Ladbroke Square. At about 12.00 Marie-Alice de Beaumarchais arrived, mainly I think as an expression of anti-Giscard solidarity. I shuffled her out of the drawing room and downstairs into the dining room and garden with Jennifer, because Crispin, Ruggiero and Hijzen, the Dutch Director-General of External Affairs, were due and I thought her French diplomatic presence might appear rather confusing, perhaps not to Crispin, but certainly to the other two!

The Buckingham Palace dinner was, in the circ.u.mstances, a surprisingly agreeable occasion. The Royal Family plus courtiers were extremely nice and forthcoming to me; so indeed-no reason at all why they should not be-were the Owens, and even the Healeys. However, I had no contact with Callaghan at all, which was probably as well. Jennifer sat at dinner between Barre and Martin Charteris.112 I sat between Mrs Macdonald, the wife of the Canadian Finance Minister, and Forlani, the Italian Foreign Minister. But I certainly could not complain about placement as I was next but one to Callaghan. Standing about before dinner, Giscard, who with Carter, as heads of state, had been allowed to arrive after the rest of us, suddenly emerged from behind my shoulder, swept up, seizing me by the hand, saying, 'Ah, mon ami Jenkins, bon soir. Comment allez-vous?' 'Bon soir, Monsieur le President de la Republique.' I replied fairly, but not excessively, coolly. He then seized Jennifer's hand and kissed it, and swept on.

I had another encounter with him a little later, when we were standing talking-Jennifer and I and Carter, and he and Martin Charteris-and Princess Margaret came up and said, 'Ah, two Presidents together.' 'No, no,' said Giscard. 'We are three Presidents. Monsieur Jenkins is President of the Commission.' So I said, 'We are all Presidents, except Sir Martin Charteris, and he is going to be a Provost, which is even better.' Slightly edged raillery was the keynote.

After dinner, Barre, having talked to Jennifer throughout dinner in French, made a point of having a long and friendly conversation with me in English, and when we said goodbye to him he insisted on inviting us to come and see him at Matignon whenever we were in Paris. I found myself at one stage having a conversation with the Queen in French, which was mainly because Barre was also there and Trudeau had come and joined us and she started very politely to talk to Barre in French, but he and Trudeau remained rather silent so one had the slightly ludicrous spectacle of the Queen and me going on exchanging conversation in French for about ten minutes. Her French is better than mine.

Foreign dignitaries treat the Royal Family differently from the way in which they are used to being treated in England. However they rolled quite well with this punch. Schmidt was smoking before the main course at dinner (an activity in which he was quickly joined by Princess Margaret) and stubbing the ends out on very high quality plate. And at the end, instead of the Royal Family withdrawing, as is normally the case, and everybody then shuffling off when they wanted to, people began to go on their own, coming up to them, saying, 'Thank you very much, it has been a very nice party but we must now get off and do some work.' But the Queen sensibly accepted this and stayed until the end so that everyone went up and thanked her on the way out and said goodbye in exactly the same way as one would do at a normal, non-royal, party.