Thank you for your letter of 6th August, on the question of
applying a certain degree of standardisation in military matters
between the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada.

2. I think the crux of the position was expressed at the Prime
Ministers' Conference last year when it was stated on behalf of
the United Kingdom Government that 'in a future war, we should
have to rely on the active assistance of the United States'. This
fact is evident not only from diminished resources of the British
Commonwealth, but from the changed strategical position in the
Middle East. Furthermore, it will be recalled that, in the last
war, the Pacific was assigned to the United States as an area of
American strategic responsibility. From the aspects of both
Australian and British Commonwealth security, which are
inseparable, I agree with your view that it is essential not only
to maintain the war-time collaboration with the United States, but
to develop it to the greatest degree possible. This can be done
quite consistently with the purposes and principles and the United
Nations. In fact, as both the people of the British Commonwealth
and the United States have peaceful aims and seek to make the
United Nations an effective body for the maintenance of peace,
such collaboration is a definite contribution to the effectiveness
of Article 43 of the Charter, under which members undertake to
make available forces to the Security Council for the maintenance
of peace and security. As mentioned by you, the wider the field of
co-operation with other great powers, the more effective would be
the forces at the disposal of the United Nations.

3. As you point out, special arrangements on defence exist between
Canada and the United States and it is noted that an announcement
last February of the results of discussions which had taken place
in the Canadian - United States Joint Board on Defence included
the following principle:-

'Encouragement of common designs and standards in arms, equipment,
organisation, methods of training and new developments. As certain
United Kingdom standards have long been in use in Canada, no
radical change is contemplated or practicable and the application
of this principle will be gradual.'

4. It is noted that it is the view of the United Kingdom Defence
Committee that the principle of standardisation between the United
States, Canada and the United Kingdom should be accepted, and that
directives have been approved for the guidance of your
representatives in Washington and Ottawa, the main points on which
agreement is sought being:-

Common operational procedures.

Similarity of tactical doctrine as a basis for training.

Collaboration in research and development.

Standardisation or interchangeability of equipment where possible.

5. As you mention these matters will have parallel repercussions
on the Australian Forces, in view of the principles laid down by
Imperial Conferences relating to standardisation in organisation,
weapons, equipment, and training. Considerable capital expenditure
may ultimately be involved in the conversion of production
capacity to American types of weapons and equipment, though the
development of new weapons may minimise this to some degree.

During the campaigns in the Southwest Pacific Area, it was evident
that standardisation would have greatly facilitated aid from the
United States and reciprocal aid from Australia.

6. I would express my agreement with the general principle being
followed and note that you will keep me informed through Service
channels of the practical application of the principle as it
develops.