Oral History Interview with
Erling Wikborg
Member of Parliament, Norway, 1945-49
Oslo, Norway
May 21, 1964
By Philip C. Brooks
[Notices and Restrictions | Interview
Transcript | List of Subjects Discussed]
NOTICE
This is a transcript of a tape-recorded interview conducted for the Harry
S. Truman Library. A draft of this transcript was edited by the interviewee
but only minor emendations were made; therefore, the reader should remember
that this is essentially a transcript of the spoken, rather than the written
word.
Numbers appearing in square brackets (ex. [45]) within the transcript
indicate the pagination in the original, hardcopy version of the oral
history interview.
RESTRICTIONS
This oral history transcript may be read, quoted from, cited, and reproduced
for purposes of research. It may not be published in full except by permission
of the Harry S. Truman Library.
Opened January 1966
Harry S. Truman Library
Independence, Missouri
[Top of the Page | Notices
and Restrictions | Interview Transcript
| List of Subjects Discussed]
Oral History Interview with
Erling Wikborg
Oslo, Norway
May 21, 1964
By Philip C. Brooks
[i]
THE INTERNATIONAL WHO'S WHO 1964-65
Wikborg, Erling; Norwegian politician; b. 94; ed. Oslo Univ., and
legal studies in France and England. Councillor, Supreme Court; mem.
of Storting (Parl.) 45-49, 54-, Minister of Foreign Affairs Aug. 63;
Chair. Christian People's Party. c/o Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Oslo, Norway.
My interview with Mr. Wikborg was set up by Mr. Douglass Ballentine,
the Counsellor of the American Embassy in Oslo, on the basis of my previous
letter to the Ambassador. .As in several cases, however, I did not know
about Mr. Wikborg until I arrived in Oslo, and therefore was not able
to do any background study on him other than the biographical sketch
in the International Who's Who.
Mr. Wikborg is a lawyer in Oslo, and was Foreign Minister of Norway
for one month.
[1]
DR. PHILIP C. BROOKS: Mr. Wikborg, would you start, please, by telling
me something of your activity in the late forties? You were a member of
Parliament, I believe.
MR. ERLING WIKBORG: Yes, I became a member of Parliament just after the
war and I have been a member of Parliament for twelve years. For the latter
part of my period in the Parliament, I was a member of the Foreign Relations
Committee.
BROOKS: And you represented what party?
[2]
WIKBORG: The Christian People's Party, which was a new party after the
war. Well, it existed also before the war, but not on a big scale. We
became a country-wide party after the war.
BROOKS: Should I think of this as an opposition party?
WIKBORG: No, we wanted to cooperate as much as possible with the others.
There was very little opposition, you see, in this country to start with
after the war because we were so eager in rebuilding our country and we
were cooperating so very well also in the political line.
BROOKS: Then, you were later in the Cabinet, were you not?
WIKBORG: Well, just for a short period. I was Minister of Foreign Affairs
last autumn, when we had a coalition government.
[3]
BROOKS: Now, Mr. Wikborg, the time I'm most concerned about is 1946
to 1948, the time at which the Marshall Plan was suggested and developed.
We regard this as a high point of the Truman Administration foreign policy
and I would like to know something of how it looked in Norway. Was it
that important to you and in what way?
WIKBORG: Well, it's many years ago now, but you see, we looked upon the
Marshall Plan as an extraordinary opportunity to rebuild our country much
faster than we would have been able to if we hadn't got that help. So,
I think it's one of the greatest events in modern history -- that the
United States did help so big a part of the world in the way they did.
We will certainly never forget it in this country.
BROOKS: Was this expected, sir? Did you think that President Truman and
General Marshall would take this strong and vigorous a stand?
[4]
WIKBORG: Well, we felt that they understood the needs of the rest of
the world. But, I don't think we could have imagined anything of the size
it took afterwards.
BROOKS: I believe it grew later to be somewhat larger than was originally
anticipated in Norway. Right?
WIKBORG: Oh yes, absolutely. I think that our government at that time
thought that we would be greatly helped if we could get assistance in
the size of about fifty million kroner. It turned out that we got three
thousand million kroner in Marshall aid.
BROOKS: What were Norway's greatest needs, Mr. Wikborg? What was this
used for primarily?
WIKBORG: Well, you see, we had lost half of our modern mercantile marine
during the war. We
[5]
had lost two million, five hundred thousand tons. We wanted to rebuild
that. Of course, we had much to draw upon, because our ships had been
insured, so we had the insurance money to start with.
BROOKS: Where did that come from? From England?
WIKBORG: From England, yes, mostly from England. You see nothing had
been built during the war, our factories, our railways, everything was
buried deep down and we had to start afresh in really every sphere of
our economic way of life and so we needed capital. We needed credit. Now
we got it.
BROOKS: You didn't have a manpower shortage, did you, a labor shortage?
WIKBORG: No, no, I can't say so. As a matter of fact, you see, we had
some fears of unemployment. Among
[6]
others one of the leading Swedish economists had told us that we had
to expect unemployment on a big scale. Well, we certainly never had it.
But, there might have been some unemployment if it had not been for the
Marshall Plan and the aid we got, and especially what reverted from the
international cooperation based upon the Marshall Plan. I'm thinking now
of the OEEC and the cooperation between the countries, the liberalization
of trade and all that, which also meant very much for our shipping.
BROOKS: I notice, if I read these figures correctly, that the percentage
of labor in Norway devoted to agriculture, forestry, and shipping has
gradually decreased, and that this has been taken up by industry.
WIKBORG: Yes, and the public service.
[7]
BROOKS: Did most people here think that at that time, Mr. Wikborg, that
the degree of cooperation among the nations was possible that was called
for by General Marshall?
WIKBORG: Yes, yes, we hoped for it. We had very great hopes for the United
Nations but you see, these hopes vanished very soon. I think we met with
the first East-West difficulties in the opening session of the United
Nations in London in 1946, and it grew deeper and deeper, and we understood
that the United Nations couldn't do very much.
BROOKS: Yes, there was some suggestion in 1947 that the planning for
the Marshall Plan should be done by a United Nations organization, the
ECE, rather than the Committee in Paris.
WIKBORG: Yes, but that was impossible, of course, with the attitude that
Soviet Russia took to the
[8]
whole scheme. They wouldn't allow Poland and Czechoslovakia for example,
to take part in the Marshall Plan...
BROOKS: Would you say that the idea or the concept of the cold war had
already started, or had it not quite crystallized?
WIKBORG: The cold war started, as a matter of fact, already in 1946.
It grew hotter, if you can say that a cold war grows hot, in 1947 and
of course in 1948.
BROOKS: What was the Foreign Relations Committee of the Legislature primarily
concerned with in these days and what did you worry most about in that
Committee? Do you remember?
WIKBORG: No. Those years I was not a member of that Committee in the
Parliament, but of course, we were mostly concerned during all these years
with the foreign relations, because we saw what
[9]
happened to the smaller countries bordering Russia. We have also a common
border with Russia and so we felt that it was a great relief when we entered
the North Atlantic Pact -NATO.
BROOKS: Mr. Wikborg, in 1947 Mr. Bevin and Mr. Bidault invited Molotov
to Paris, and the Russians were invited to take part in the Marshall Plan.
Is it fair to ask you if you thought it was a good idea to invite the
Russians, and if people here thought the Russians would participate?
WIKBORG: Well we hoped so. It's rather difficult to remember all such
details just now, but we certainly hoped for it, because we wanted, as
far as we could, to be bridgebuilders between the two at that time. We
thought that possible. But we were very disappointed, of course, when
we saw what attitude the Russians
[10]
took.
BROOKS: And, since they took that attitude, would you say that the Marshall
Plan worked better without them or not?
WIKBORG: Well, it's a new problem for me to answer, but I think it would
have been a very fine thing if they had been taken into the Marshall Plan
and if they had developed more rapidly than they did. Because, I think
that their increase in standard of living is part of the security of the
world. So the sooner that can come about, the better. But, now, of course,
when we look upon it, it was impossible because of their idea.
BROOKS: Were the Eastern European countries very important to Norway
in respect to trade?
WIKBORG: No. We have been a westward looking country
[11]
always. That's our position. To England and the United States, there
we have our largest trade. There, we also have our best friends.
BROOKS: We're glad of that. The desire to work with the Russians, if
possible, was largely a political thing, rather than seeking markets?
WIKBORG: Yes, but we also believed that if a market of some two hundred
million people, if they should develop, well that would be to the good
for all of us. Especially for Norway with its large shipping.
BROOKS: May I ask you somewhat a similar question about Germany, Mr.
Wikborg? There must have been a good deal of bitterness toward the Germans,
and yet Germany is a very important export market for Norway. Did the
Norwegians favor
[12]
allowing the Germans to develop a high degree of the "level of
industry?"
WIKBORG: Well, we thought it was a good thing for Europe as a whole that
they could rebuild their country as fast as possible, although we know
they are very clever and that they had some chances there that we haven't
got. But, still, I think it was all to the best for all of us.
BROOKS: In the work of the Committee, the CEEC at Paris and the OEEC
after it was set up, did you think that Norwegian interests were fairly
represented and that the people there understood the Norwegian needs?
WTKBORG: Yes, I think so.
BROOKS: As I understand it, each country came to those meetings with
certain wishes and estimates, and these had to be debated and cut down.
In
[13]
one or two countries I have been told that they were cut down too much.
I take it the Norwegians didn't feel that way.
WIKBORG: Well, as I now remember it, I think we have been very satisfied
with the working of the OEEC. Of course, we have wanted to see, especially
now in the OECD that our shipping interests are included in the whole
cooperation scheme, which does not always suit the United States' interests
very well.
BROOKS: And you feel that the shipping interests haven't always been
well represented?
WIKBORG: There were some discussions whether it should be part of the
OECD. I think in time this was accepted by the United States.
BROOKS: This wasn't a matter of the amount of tonnage that Norway should
rebuild or...
[14]
WIKBORG: No. There were some discriminatory measures taken by the United
States Government in international shipping. And, we were not very happy
about that. But, that's an old story.
BROOKS: General Marshall made his speech at Harvard in 1947, asking for
the cooperation of the European countries in this program, and everybody
knew there was no chance of having the program approved by the United
States Congress for months and months. Did this, itself, present a problem
in the following critical months? I believe you had a hard winter...
WIKBORG: Well, we were fighting our difficulties all the time, and I
think we never reckoned with any aid of that kind. But of course, we had
difficulties, grave difficulties. There were so many things that had to
be done at once,
[15]
and we couldn't do everything at once. We used most of our resources
for the building up of our country, so we had some quite meager years.
BROOKS: I imagine it's difficult for us to realize quite how meager.
WIKBORG: Yes, I think that's impossible. But, we all felt that we had
to do it that way. We didn't get excited about it, there was no great
opposition.
BROOKS: During that winter, there were extensive debates in the American
Congress. Were the Norwegians following all that?
WIKBORG: Oh, yes, of course, we did. We always follow what's going on
in your country.
BROOKS: And the Congress sent a mission of its own, the Herter Mission
over here in the fall of 1947,
[16]
and certain other missions that came to collect information. I think
some people in Norway at the time, and in other countries, felt that the
planning and organization of the program should be through the U.N., and
you already said you thought that was unrealistic.
WIKBORG: Yes, I think that was unrealistic at that time.
BROOKS: Do you think, on the other hand, that the U.N. has been weakened
by the fact that the Marshall Plan was not a U.N. program?
WIKBORG: No, not at all, because, it's a great advantage for the United
Nations that the Western nations are as strong as possible.
BROOKS: Would you say that there was much difference of opinion between
groups within Norway about economic recovery, United States
[17]
aid, the Marshall Plan and so forth? Did the labor people have a different
point of view from industry, or from agriculture, or from shipping?
WIKBORG: No, I don't think so. Of course, our Communists were not very
happy about the development.
BROOKS: I believe about 10 percent of the legislature were Communists?
WIKBORG: At that time, yes. Not any more. They have no representatives
in Parliament at present. As far as I can recollect it now, I think we
were very much in agreement. We had certain different opinions upon whether
the government should build certain new industries or whether the private
people should do it. But, in regard to the Marshall Plan and the use of
the help we got, I think there was very little disagreement.
[18]
BROOKS: Mr. Wikborg, did the fact that the Marshall Plan aid had to
come through the government lead to a problem as to whether industrial
development should be state controlled or whether there should be more
encouragement to private industry?
WIKBORG: No, I don't think so. But, of course, on that point you would
be much better informed by the people, for example, in our industrial
associations.
BROOKS: You mentioned a while ago that there was some question as to
whether certain industries should be built by the government or by private
industry.
WIKBORG: Yes, because some of us don't believe very much in state-owned
industry. So, we had some iron works built and certain aluminum mills
[19]
built, and we thought that, if possible, that should have been done
on a private basis.
BROOKS: But the Marshall Plan, itself, didn't complicate that?
WIKBORG: No, no, not at all. The Marshall Plan eased all our problems,
as a matter of fact. When our labor government tries to tell of all the
good things they have done, we always remind them: "Don't forget
the Marshall Plan, what that meant to our country."
BROOKS: Everybody agrees on that?
WIKBORG: Oh, yes.
BROOKS: At the same time that the United States Government was working
on the Marshall Plan, it was also working on the program of aid to Greece
and Turkey, which was primarily military
[20]
and economic aid against the Communists. Was this something of concern
and interest here, or was this looked on as quite a different program?
This is what is called the Truman Doctrine.
WIKBORG: Yes, I would say that that was a different question. Of course,
we also got much military aid. I think to an even greater mark than we
received Marshall aid.
BROOKS: One thing that has interested me is a question as to whether
all this expenditure for foreign aid was primarily cast in terms of fighting
against the Communists, or as a matter of simply economic recovery within
Europe itself.
WIKBORG: Well, it meant both. Because, a weak Western Europe meant a
real danger. It was too
[21]
tempting.
BROOKS: Down in Italy and Greece, the people I talked to told me that
the Greek-Turkish aid program and the Marshall Plan were all one in the
same, that one led to the other. But naturally, I suppose, the Greek-Turkish
aid thing wasn't so prominent up here?
WIKBORG: No, but we were very happy when the United Kingdom couldn't
help the Greeks, that you stepped in and did help them. That meant the
freedom of Greece.
BROOKS: Yes, someone told me that if the United States hadn't stepped
in, they might have had chaos and disorder within three weeks. It was
that close.
WIKBORG: Yes, I do not doubt that for a moment.
BROOKS: Would you say that the Norwegians believed
[22]
or perhaps hoped that the Marshall Plan would lead to European economic
union or political union, or a common market?
WIKBORG: No, we had no thought of that kind, that came later. It started
in about 1950 or even later than that.
BROOKS: There were some individuals that were talking about it before
1947, but it wasn't really a major factor until then?
WIKBORG: No, we had too much to do with the more present problems.
BROOKS: Now, while you were on the Foreign Relations Committee in Parliament,
this program was developing. Would you say that, generally, relations
with the organization in Paris were good, at this time and went along
well?
[23]
WIKBORG: Yes, certainly, yes. We have nothing to say about that; it
has been working very well. We have paid much attention to the programs,
and the prognosis, and the reports. For example, they issue a report on
the Norwegian economic position, every year, you know. It is very important
and we pay much attention to that. We are very happy for that cooperation.
BROOKS: Would you say that the whole organization in Paris represented
about the first high degree of international cooperation of this sort
since the war?
WIKBORG: Yes, absolutely, Oh, yes, absolutely. I don't remember if the
Truman Doctrine came before the Marshall aid or after.
BROOKS: I believe it was before. Truman's speech on Greece and Turkey
was in March; the Marshall
[24]
Plan was in June.
WIKBORG: It's all part of one big world policy, which makes Mr. Truman
one of the really big statesmen of our time. Because the Truman Doctrine
was the hope for all smaller nations, and the Marshall Plan, of course,
was the economic part of that big scheme.
BROOKS: I hope this is a fair question. What would you think most Norwegians
thought of the motives of the United States? Was this primarily a matter
of altruism and generosity, an idealistic measure? Or was it pretty much
practical building up of export markets for the United States?
WIKBORG: Oh, it's far too complicated to give one answer to that question.
But, I know the United States quite well.
BROOKS: You have an office there, don't you?
[25]
WIKBORG: Why, yes, as a matter of fact, we have. I've been to the United
States very often and in Norwegian delegations to the United Nations several
times. I think I know something about the American way of life and the
way the Americans look upon life; I know also the idealism of the people
of the United States. But, of course, at the same time, it was in your
material interest. A weak and probably conquered West Europe, for that
matter, meant a menace also to you. But still, it's very seldom that you
find statesmen looking that far ahead. They're mostly thinking of the
nearest positions, and questions, and problems.
BROOKS: It really requires long-range planning.
WIKBORG: Yes, it was. And that's what makes a statesman. Take for example
Bismarck, Winston Churchill, and your own Roosevelt. They thought
[26]
very, very far ahead.
BROOKS: I'm going to see Mr. Marjolin in Paris next week. Do you know
him? Did you work with him? He was the secretary of the OEEC.
WIKBORG: No, I never went down to the OEEC.
BROOKS: Most of my questions are devoted to this initial period, because
we're interested in the policy of our government and their actions at
the beginning of the Marshall Plan, but I'm also concerned with how it
worked out. Now, the committee at Paris in 1947, Mr. Wikborg, drew up
plans that called for a four-year program involving a total of nineteen
billion dollars. As it worked out, the job was done in less time and with
less money, and I believe that was true in Norway, as well as in the rest
of Europe.
[27]
WIKBORG: Yes, I think so.
BROOKS: You would say generally that the program worked out, was administered
well, and worked out as it was hoped for?
WIKBORG: Oh, yes, absolutely. I think you will find a unanimous Norwegian
opinion to that effect.
BROOKS: Are there any other phases of this development that you think
we ought to mention that I have left out?
WIKBORG: No, I see the Marshall Plan as one of the major factors in the
miraculous rebuilding of Europe that happened after the war.
BROOKS: Did you people feel that Great Britain or
[28]
any other power exerted too much leadership or too much dominance in
the development of this plan in Paris?
WIKBORG: No, I have no feeling on that. Maybe there might have been some
small difficulties but as a whole, no. I would say absolutely no.
BROOKS: Do you have any impressions or memories of some of the individuals
who were involved, either the top level people like Mr. Truman, Bidault,
or Bevin; or some of the working level people like Mr. Gross and other
who were here in Norway?
WIKBORG: No, I think it worked very well and I can't remember that we
had any difficulties whatsoever. It went very smoothly and it's always
been so easy for us here to cooperate with the people of the United States.
BROOKS: Have you met Mr. Truman?
[29]
WIKBORG: No, I never met him. But, I knew very much about him.
BROOKS: Or General Marshall? Is Marshall highly regarded here?
WIKBORG: Of course he is. He received the Nobel Prize. He was an outstanding
man of the finest character and with a very deep understanding of the
world problems. I think we shall thank God that we had such men.
BROOKS: For some time I have had correspondence with Mr. Halvard Lange,
and I have an interview with him.
WIKBORG: Yes, he will tell you very much the same thing I have told you.
I know him very well, and I have cooperated with him for many years. When
I took over for a short while from him we told each other we had exactly
the same views about the
[30]
foreign questions, so there wouldn't be any difference in our foreign
policy whatsoever. And, he said, "I trust you," and I said,
"I trust you, and I thank you for all your help." That's the
way we dealt with the matters. As a matter of fact, foreign policy, since
the war, has hardly been a controversial question with us. We had the
Communists, of course, and maybe now, some people on the left side of
the Labor Party, who grumble a little, but our general policy has practically
a unanimous people behind it.
You see, when you come to think of it, we have had a labor government
now for twenty-five years. They call themselves Socialists. There was
one big Socialist country in the world, that was Soviet Russia. And there
was one big Capitalist country in the world, and that was the United States.
But, when we had to take sides, we didn't take sides with the Socialist
country.
[31]
So, that shows that interests and traditions are stronger than theories.
[Top of the Page | Notices
and Restrictions | Interview Transcript
| List of Subjects Discussed]
List of Subjects Discussed
Ballentine, Douglas, i
Bevin, Ernest, 9, 28
Bidault, Georges, 9, 28
Christian People's Party, 2
Churchill, Winston, 25
Cold war, 8
Common Market, 22
Czechoslovakia, 8
Foreign Relations Committee of Norway, 1
Germany, 11-12
Greece, 19-20, 21, 23
Harvard University, 14
Herter Mission, 15
Italy, 21
Lange, Halvard, 29-30
London, England., 7
Marjolin, Robert, 26
Marshall, George C., 3, 7, 14,
16, 22, 29
Marshall plan, 23-24
Molotov, V.M., 9
Nobel Prize, 29
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 9
Norway, 24
economic conditions in, 14-15
economic needs of, 4
and Germany, 11-12
and the government of, 30
and the Marshall plan, 3-4, 6, 16-19,
26-27
the Parliament of, 1
shipping industry in, 13-14
and unemployment, 5-6
Organization of European Economic Cooperation, 6,
12-13, 26
Oslo, Norway, i
Paris conference, 7, 9, 12,
22, 26
Poland, 8
Roosevelt, Franklin D., 25
Truman, Harry S., 3, 24, 28-29
Truman Doctrine, 19-20, 21, 23
Turkey, 19-20, 21, 23
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 7-9, 11,
30
and the Marshall plan, 9-10
United Kingdom, 5, 11
and the Marshall plan, 27-28
United Nations, 7, 16
United States, 11, 13-14, 15,
16-17, 19, 30
and Wikborg, Erling, 24-25
Wikborg, Erling, i
and the Christian People's Party, 2
and the Foreign Relations Committee, 1
and Lange, Halvard, 29-30
as Minister of Foreign Affairs, 2
and the Norwegian Parliament, l
and the United States, 24-25
[Top of the Page | Notices
and Restrictions | Interview Transcript
| List of Subjects Discussed]
|