In a note dated 1 April 1981, the Secretary-General of Western European Union (WEU) circulates the reply from the WEU Council to Assembly Recommendation 362 on international industrial consortia and collaborative arrangements for the production of high technology military equipment. The reply is largely based on the French proposal (WPM(81)11). The changes are mostly in paragraph 5: the Council does not retain France’s text, which emphasised the role of consortia and suggested that they should become the general rule for ‘requests for proposals’ issued by military staffs. The final reply confirms that each state is free to decide how such requests are passed on to industry.
The minutes of the joint meeting between the Council of Western European Union (WEU) and the Committee on Defence Questions of the WEU Assembly on 2 December 1958 in London record the debates held in the morning and afternoon sessions. At this meeting, the first session, chaired by Lord Henry Lansdowne from the United Kingdom, focuses on cooperation in the field of armaments. Lord Lansdowne notes that close cooperation in armaments research, development and production is necessary for financial reasons, in view of the cost and complexity of modern weapons, and also for political reasons, particularly given the role that armaments cooperation can play in achieving closer European unity in the light of the communist threat. Cooperation on a case-by-case basis has been established through various bilateral and trilateral arrangements under the aegis of WEU and between the WEU countries through the Standing Armaments Committee (SAC). Two lists of proposals for cooperation have been put forward, one by the United Kingdom and the other by France, Italy and Germany, and are considered to come within the field of action of WEU. Lord Lansdowne underlines that the security considerations are not the main obstacle to armaments cooperation, that the Council is satisfied with the progress made by the SAC and that there is no need to step up the work at the current time. Finally, he points out that WEU should not take decisions entirely independently of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) unless cooperation with third countries does not yield results.
In a note dated 22 May 1963, the Secretary-General of Western European Union (WEU) circulates the reply by the WEU Council to Assembly Recommendation 85 on standardisation and interdependence in the production of armaments. The text is identical to the proposal made by the French delegation on 14 May 1963 (C(63)53).
On 19 March 1955, the Secretary-General of Western European Union (WEU) sends the Committee of Experts a document submitted jointly by the Belgian and French delegations on the desirability of armaments standardisation. The note outlines the operational, logistical and economic factors that influence the choice of equipment to be standardised.
This extract form he minutes of the meeting of the Council of Western European Union (WEU) on 6 March 1957 depicts the debates on further steps to stimulate and extend cooperation in the field of research, development and production within the framework of the Standing Armaments Committee (SAC). The Chairman asks the delegations if this matter is ready for examination. The British representative Lord Samuel Hood does not think so, arguing that it would be better to await the outcome of technical consultations before launching a political debate. French representative Jean Chauvel also wonders whether it is a good idea for the Council to take fresh steps at the moment and whether it would not be preferable for the International Secretariat of the SAC to provide the Council with information on progress made so that it can consider any action that should be taken.
On 6 December 1961, the Western European Union (WEU) Council meets to discuss Recommendation No 68 (C(61)182) on the Standing Armaments Committee and the joint production of armaments. The Council approves the slightly amended version of paragraph 4 of the British draft reply proposed by French representative Jean Chauvel, as well as various formal amendments to the English text.
At its meeting on 12 February 1958, the Council of Western European Union (WEU) analyses cooperation between France, Germany and Italy in the field of arms production. A statement is made on behalf of the three governments, and the French representative, Jean Chauvel, sets out France’s position on the European contribution to Atlantic cooperation in the field of armaments. In view of the financial, technical and industrial difficulties, France proposes the introduction of a joint regional programme with the aim of harmonising military concepts concerning the organisation, use and equipment of armed forces with the directives of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), in the interests of common defence.
In its note dated 20 November 1981, the Secretary-General of Western European Union (WEU) circulates the Council’s reply to Assembly Recommendation 368 on the European combat aircraft and other aeronautical developments. Various British amendments incorporated into the final version insist on the intention of the countries concerned to explore the way forward in this field. The Council also clearly states that any further progress is dependent on the harmonisation of characteristics currently being discussed between the military authorities and the staff of the armaments directors of the various countries.
On 30 April 1980, the Secretary-General of Western European Union (WEU) circulates the Council’s reply to Recommendation 339 from the WEU Assembly on the industrial bases of European security — guidelines drawn from the symposium on 15, 16 and 17 October 1979. The final text follows the wording of the draft prepared by the French delegation (WPM(80)13/1).
The minutes of the fourth plenary meeting of the working party on production and standardisation of armaments of 31 January 1955 set out the continued discussions on the French memorandum (PWG/A/2). United Kingdom representative Sir Christopher Steel agrees with the aims set forth in the preamble, namely to increase efficiency of logistic services in the military sphere, to reduce costs and to harmonise the various interests in the economic sphere. However, the United Kingdom emphasises that it is unable to take part in supranational institutions and does not believe that this solution could lead to successful results. The French plan would enable savings to be made, but at the cost of production efficiency. Furthermore, the British Government identifies two problems — German demand and the reduction of American aid — which affect the countries of Western European Union (WEU). It does not appear to be advisable to duplicate the existing machinery in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) in the field of standardisation and production. In this respect, Sir Christopher Steel believes that it would be possible to establish joint machinery by means of which WEU, using the NATO machinery, should be able to give that machinery the necessary impulse. French representative Alexandre Parodi prefers to restrict his remarks to the general discussion, but notes that without an institution entrusted with the task of organisation, it would be impossible to achieve adequate unification of production methods and efforts would continue to be dissipated.