Secret
S003-104 Vol 2
January 17, 1963
Mr. NA Robertson,
Under-Secretary of State
for External Affairs, East Block,
Ottawa, Ontario.
International Agreements
Use of Airfields in France
The agreement between Canada and France regarding the Construction and Use of airfields dated May 14, 1952, stipulates in Article 2 that there shall be prior agreement between the two governments if there is to be any change in the strength or type of unit located on the airfields in question.
The CF-100 squadrons at Grostenquin and Marville were disbanded on January 1, 1963. Current RCAF programs for the re-equipment of 1 Air Division envisage the following schedule of events, although it is possible that there may be some adjustment in the activation dates for the CF-104 squadrons:
|
(a) |
Disbandment of the F-86 Squadrons at Grostenquin on August 1, 1963, and at Marville on November 1, 1963. |
|
(b) |
Establishment of a Strike/Reconnaissance Wing comprising two squadrons with a total of 36 CF-104 aircraft, at Grostenquin on September 2, 1963, and at Marville on December 9, 1963. |
|
(c) |
The continued use of Rocroi as a deployment base to be occupied as required by one CF-104 squadron. |
In proposing an amendment to Annex "A" to the Agreement, it is suggested reference to armament be omitted as under present plans these aircraft will remain unarmed while on French bases.
In view of the recent withdrawal of the CF-100 Squadrons from Marville and Grostenquin on January 1, 1963, it is suggested that it may be timely to negotiate a complete revision of Annex "A" to the Airfields Agreement. To this end, I have attached a draft of Annex "A" which reflects the situation which will exist in December 1963, when the re-equipment of 1 Air Division will have been largely completed.
With the conversion of the Air Division to its new role, some changes have been or are in the course of being made in the completion of certain of the supporting units detailed in Annex "B" to the Agreement of May 14, 1952. We are not yet in a position to determine precisely how these changes should be reflected in amendments to Annex "B", but will be putting forward proposals at a later date. In the meantime, however, we believe it desirable not to delay revision of Annex "A".
EB Armstrong,
Deputy Minister
Confidential
Annex "A"
Revised
1963
