 | theory that Ramadier was acting under American orders to expel the Communists, a theory advanced by, among other leftist writes, Lachoix-Riz,
La choix de Marianne,
12022. There is also some very illuminating material on the crisis in the papers of the MRP, AN, 350 AP, box 45, April 30, May 2, and May 4, which shows the depth of MRP hostility to the PCF, but also shows Bidault's resistance to American interference in the constitution of a new government.
|
| 3. The literature is large, but see esp. Hogan,
The Marshall Plan;
Wexler,
The Marshall Plan Revisited;
Arkes,
Bureaucracy, the Marshall Plan, and the National Interest;
Kindleberger,
Marshall Plan Days;
Fossedal,
Our Finest Hour;
Jones,
The Fifteen Weeks
.
|
| 4. Bossuat has done extensive research into the operation of the Marshall Plan in France, in
La France, l'aide américaine et la construction européenne
. See also Esposito,
America's Feeble Weapon: Funding the Marshall Plan in France and Italy,
and Poidevin, "Ambiguous Partnership: France, the Marshall Plan and the Problem of Germany."
|
| 5. Report from the Service de Documentation Extérieure et de Contre-espionnage, July 2, 1947, Bidault Papers, AN, 457 AP, box 20. See also Caffery's reports to Washington, both of July 2, 1947,
FRUS 1947,
3: 3046. Bidault's attempt to mediate a solution to Molotov's objections, Caffery reported, "was dictated not in the belief that it would be acceptable to the Russians but for reasons of French politics." Elgey argues that Bidault wanted the Soviets to withdraw from the start (
La République des illusions,
327). The concerns he raised in the cabinet about Soviet participation lend support to this view. See Auriol,
Journal du Septennat,
1: 26667, 274, 292; and Bidault's July 2 report to the cabinet on the failure of the conference, vindicating his earlier pessimism, 32325. The best account of the talks is in Bullock,
Ernest Bevin,
41727, and Hogan,
Marshall Plan,
5153. The French Foreign Ministry published some documents from the conference:
Documents de la conférence des ministres des affaires étrangères de la France, du Royaume Uni, de l'U.R.S.S., Paris, 27 juin au 3 juillet, 1947
. For a look at the Soviet side, see Narinsky and Parish, "New Evidence on the Soviet Rejection of the Marshall Plan, 1947."
|
| 6. See Caffery's telegram to State, June 29, 1947, NARA, RG 59, 840.50 Recovery, box 5729; and his telegrams of July 1 and 4, 1947, box 5730, in which he reports that "Bidault has behaved very well." Douglas to State, July 4, 1947,
FRUS, 1947,
3: 310, reported Bevin's praise of Bidault.
|
| 7. July 9, 1947, MAE, Y-Internationale 194449, vol. 129. See also Auriol,
Journal du Septennat,
1:337. Caffery was present at this encounter and reported his own impressions: July 11, 1947, NARA, RG 59, 840.50 Recovery, box 5730.
|
| 8.
Memorandum de Jean Monnet pour G. Bidault sur la conférence de Paris,
July 22, 1947, Monnet Papers, AN, AMF 14/1/4; and
Memorandum remis à M. G. Bidault par M. J. Monnet sur la question des "crédits Marshall,"
July 24, 1947, AMF 14/1/6; July 1, 1947, AMF 14/1/1; two dated July 24, 1947, AMF 14/1/5 and AMF 14/1/7.
|
| 9. Accounts of the CEEC include van der Beugel (a Dutch delegate),
From Marshall Aid to Atlantic Partnership,
6882; Wexler,
The Marshall Plan Revisited,
|
|
