https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/38f913a6f1cb857f1dc262d16404e71d.pdf 82e4295efa7d1043bdf8eb9f6ef9a625 PDF Text Text m T O P C R K 7 OFFICE O F T H E C H A I R M A N , CHIEFS OF STAFF OTTAWA wv'M, MNADP 1 OCT 9 4 o PEKRU-TD... BEST AVAILABLE COPY u 24 Scptcmbcr 1959» CMtVOTO Air Vice £larshal rut]. Hendrick, Chairman, Canadian Joint Staff, 2450 I&ssaehusetts Avenue, G.U., Uaohlnston g, D.C. negotiations for the Provision of Atonic Uarheada or Ueaoons to Canada 1* Attached for your roao^y reference io a copy of tho draft of the note «hlch mo loft tilth tho U.S. authorities for thoir comment tosetaor td.th a copy of the U.S. ro~draft in reply* the U.S. re*draft has been studied and tho folloisins are our comments. 2. It io considered that tho 0.5, re^draft represents i a departure frem tho typo of agreement originally contemplated I' as set out In tho letter from tho Chairman.. U.S. Joint Chiefs ' i of Staff, to the Chaiman, Canadian Chiefs of Staff, ; refcrenco JGS8»164~59 dated 1 a y 1959» copy of u M c h is v also enclosed, in that it relates oolely to tho stockpiling of nuclear trarhoads in Canada. It makes no provision for supplying warheads to Canadian forces in Canada and Overseas and implies in effect that tho warheads to bo stockpiled are for U.D. tiao in support of Canadian forces and G.iJ. forces. Aa you are a^aro, tho stockpiles for atomic t/capono or '> tmrheads for use of U.0. forces 1» Canada aro tho subject of .u/^, separate a_rt3ements and therefore it would appear that there v ^ ^ io no need for any mention of U.S. forces in this particular secernent* 3. It #111 be noted that in General Staining's letter of 1 Kay, it states in paragraph 2(a) that arrangements for the provision of atonic tfcapons to Canadian forces should bo in consonance with tho plana and requirements of tho commander concerned (i.e. SACEUE, SACLAE? and CIECIIOIiAD). Purthor, certain aspects of the overall arrangements, such as, detailed technical agreements pertaining to custody and control will bo accomplished on a bilateral basis with the u%3» Commanders concerned, i.e., CIHCIAHT, USCIKCEUR and CIECOIJAD, a3 in para_raph 2(c) of tho letter* Further, it trill ho noted that in paragraph 2(b) of tho letter it states that tho note ahould cover security and broad system safety requirements (render oafo proceduresJ «hich have not boon included in tho U.S. re-draft• 4. Apart from tho necessity for a suitable wording to bo included in the text of the note to cover tho omissions mentioned in paragraphs 2 and 3 above, suggested amendments to the sub*para_rapho to paragraph 2- of the U.S. ro«*draft are as follows* . (a) In sub-paragraph 1 tp pa»58$kvph. 2 the cords "and tho U.S.W should be deleted. m I0M 2-51 (M-3180) \ H.Q. 224-15-3 _• . J *. • /2 . _ 000187 �— 2 — Uith rogard to tho last sentence in subparagraph 2, it is felt that it should not bo insisted that the normal logistic support, e.g.. housing, messing and offices, o t c , should be built and maintained in a manner omearablo to U»S. standards but that such §acilitics should bo built and maintained as "mutually agreed" as wo are confident that our Canadian standards will suffice. With reference to sub-paragraph 3, it is suggested that this paragraph should be re-worded as follows? "It is recognised that tho custody of any stocks of atomic weapons provided by tho U.S. vAll be the joint responsibility of Canada and tho U.S. and that Canadian and U.S. personnel will bo provided in Canada for this purpose. Tho status of U.S. personnel will bo governed by the provision of the JIATO Status of Forces Agroement and any supplementary arrangements which may be agreed upon." With regard to sub-paragraph 4, it is considered that instead of using tho words "appropriate Allied Coimaander" this ohould be spoiled out as follows: "...by the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, by SACLAUT in tho North Atlantic Ocean and in accordance with procedures governing HORAD»s operations as approvod in advance by both Governments." It is also felt that tho wording of paragraphs 4 and 5 should bo clarified so that it refers only to nuclear weapons or warheads in storage and not from tho operational aspect «,as it is presumed that arrangemonto to cover this aspect will be included in tho bilateral agreements with CinCLAIJT, USCIIICEUR and CIUCIIOHAD. With regard to sub-paragraph 7 t It -® felt that this ohould be reworded referring to existing procedures governing the movement of nuclear weapons in ovorflights of U3AF aircraft, e.g., "U.S. forces will bo responsible for the movement of atomic weapons or warheads to locations in Canada in accordance with a procedure similar to that which already exists for USAF overflights. Canadian forces will be responsible for the transportation of weapons within Canada subject always to the provisions of Article 3 above." It is felt that the reference to points of exit for intra-theatre redistribution of woapons would be covered in tho bilateral agreements which will be raado with either CIIICLAHT, USCIIICEUR or CIKCOIIAD as necessary. •..»/i �** 3 ** (f} Reference sub-paragraph 9» It io felt that tho v/ord "reasonable" should be inserted before administrative in the second line. 5. It is suggested that you uso tho above suggestions as guidance to nogotiato tho proposed U.S. re-draft with tho U.S. military authorities. In doing so, you ohould also make clear that as far as we aro concerned this is only being done at tho military level as we wished to obtain provisional agreement between the military authorities before submitting the proposed draft to tho Department of External Affairs for finaliaation with tho State Department. 6. I mention this because when I discussed this matter with General Lopor I gained the imprceslon that he felt that our original draft of 6 August 1959* would bo acceptable to them tslth one or two minor amendments. It would appear therefore that tho reason for tho radical change in the U.S. re-draft is becauoo the staff of tho Socretary of Dofonce have now used a previous agreement with another HATO European country as a basis, although the samo conditions do not apply. It is also noted that tho u»D, re-draft has already been discussed informally with State Department representatives. However, Canada Is in a different position to that of M 2 Q L _ European countries as oeT^aratcuagrcements are being,made to take care of ITHj* forces requirements iJtTlIanaaa anaHxscauso provision siiou-tHTo maTle in~tho note to cover"the. stockpiling or weapons for use of^Canadlan 'forces outside of Canada, such as, tno lirigade and the Air_ "Division in Europe^ Therefore^ It will oe apprecTaVd^That lt*~wXii oo necessary for this particular note to bo somewhat different in concept than similar agrocnents tho U.S. have had t?ith other European IIATO countries. Original signed by •;Gen. Charles FoulkfeS (Charles Foulkes) General, Chairman, Chiefs of Staff, � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context CDNW00232 Title A name given to the resource CDNW00232 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived "Acquisition And Storage Of Nuclear Weapons For Canadian Forces In Canada And Europe," RG24-B-1, vol 21439, file CSC 1888:9, part 1, Library and Archives Canada (LAC). Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Canadian Crown Subject The topic of the resource Nuclear Weapons Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Canada Declassified Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Language A language of the resource en