https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/2ce43180262d913333ca492b30f217b8.pdf 9c08c08d7df7fac2baa36115265511da PDF Text Text APPENDIX ^ A " SECRET EXTRACT, .FROMXANADA w UJm:ED..S^ JOINT DEFENCE - RECORD OF MEETING OF DECEMBER 15, 1958 - ' • • - — ' —'- ' i— ' n - , „ - - i l l — • . , . , . • __ — I I i * . . — -• ,jfa mil •• — I I P r o b l e m s Connected with the Acquisition and Control^of.Defensive Nuclear Weapona in Canada M r . Smith opened d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s item and distributed to the meeting I a draft statement for possible use in the Canadian House of Commons r e g a r d i n g the-.acquisition and control of nuclear w e a p o n s . (Statement attached a s Annex I ) . He indicated that the draft did not n e c e s s a r i l y r e p r e s e n t the definitive views of the Canadian Government. Minister. It had not, for e x a m p l e , been seen by the P r i m e It was being tabled at this m e e t i n g in the hope that it would s e r v e a s a useful focus for d i s c u s s i o n of the agenda topic. The statement had been drafted with broad political c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in mind, since it would be n e c e s s a r y for the Government to give some indication at the next s e s s i o n of P a r l i a ment of its plans with r e s p e c t to the acquisition and control of defensive n u c l e a r weapons for use by the Canadian f o r c e s . After studying the statement M r . McElroy first commented on the second sentence of p a r a g r a p h 6. He suggested the inclusion of the p h r a s e "the production of" before "nuclear w e a p o n s " . It was the United States intention to provide its NATO p a r t n e r s with "know-how" to enable all NATO forces to function with nuclear weapons if that should become niecessary. The United States did not, h o w e v e r , intend to p r o v i d e the technical knowledge r e q u i r e d for the production of nuclear weapons. T h i s r e v i s i o n was accepted by the m e e t i n g . Mr» Dulles suggested that p e r h a p s the l a s t p h r a s e of the first sentence of p a r a g r a p h 7 might be amended to r e a d "nuclear weapons of a defensive and d e t e r r e n t c h a r a c t e r " . M r . Smith said the Government wished to deal publicly, in the first instance at l e a s t , with such^purely defensive n u c l e a r weapons as might be r e q u i r e d for use by Canadian f o r c e s . The Canadian Government w a s , of c o u r s e , aware of the i n t e r e s t of the United �SECRET APPENDIX "A" - P a g e 2 . States Government in the storage, of weapons, i n Canada for s t r a t e g i c use but believed that this, question.should not be dealt with at this t i m e . M r . MtrElroy said that of c o u r s e the United States r e g a r d e d its s t r a t e g i c weapons a s ' d e f e n s i v e weapons. M r . Fleming said that, while admitting it was not always e a s y to draw a line between v a r i o u s weapons, it did seem to him that some weapons by t h e i r siting and c h a r a c t e r could be r e g a r d e d a s purely defensive. M r . Dulles said he did not wish to p r e s s h i s suggestion. M r . McElroy said he was not c e r t a i n what was meant by the p h r a s e "co-ordinated with the efforts of our NATO p a r t n e r s " in p a r a g r a p h 8. The United States Government did not wish NORAD to be operated under E u r o p e a n Command. M r . P e a r k e s said that the Canadian Government did not envisage that NORAD s operations would come d i r e c t l y under NATO command, but c e r tainly the Government thought of NORAD's operations as p a r t of NATO's d e t e r r e n t strength. One of NORAD's p r i m a r y p u r p o s e s was to give g r e a t e r s e c u r i t y to the forces of retaliation based in North A m e r i c a . M r , McElroy commented that the United States Strategic Air Command, of c o u r s e , was not p a r t of the NATO military structure. M r . Smith said that p e r h a p s some other p h r a s e such as " r e l a t e d t o " might be substituted for the p h r a s e " c o - o r d i n a t e d with"; but c e r t a i n l y the Canadian Government r e g a r d e d NORAD a s p a r t of the total defensive b u r d e n borne by the Canadian Government in c a r r y i n g out its c o m m i t m e n t s to NATO. He believed it would be m o r e a c c e p t a b l e 'tb^fchfr•Cihadian Government if any special a r r a n g e m e n t s which had to be made with the United States in t h i s context w e r e to come under the g e n e r a l u m b r e l l a of C a n a d a ' s NATO c o m m i t m e n t s i M r . Dulles said that he had no objection to the p h r a s e " c o - o r d i n a t e d with" as long as both sides understood what was m e a n t . M r . Dulles then suggested that the p h r a s i n g of the first sentence of p a r a g r a p h 10 might be changed somewhat to reflect A l a s k a ' s new position as a s t a t e . It was agreed that the relevant p h r a s e should r e a d "the a i r defence of Canada and the continental United States including A l a s k a " . »»• 3 000147 �APPENDIX.'*''A«••••> P a g e 3 . M r . McElroy said he was not c e r t a i n that the third kentence: of para-, graph 10 should be left in its p r e s e n t f o r m . The sentence now r e a d s , "In the event that t h e s e defensive weapons a r e made available for u s e by the Canadian and United States forces serving under NORAD they could be used only in a c c o r dance with p r o c e d u r e s governing NORAD's operations approved by the two governments". the s e n t e n c e . M r . McElroy said that he did not d i s a g r e e with the substance of He thought that it might be w i s e , h o w e v e r , to conclude the d i s - c u s s i o n s which w e r e going on b e t w e e n t h e Canadian and United States s e r v i c e s with r e s p e c t to operational p r o c e d u r e s before anything was said publicly. M r . Smith said that he felt that the Canadian Government would be in a difficult position u n l e s s it could a s s u r e the Canadian public soon of Canadian participartion in control of the Use Of defensive n u c l e a r weapons. M r . McElroy said that he did not d i s a g r e e with the Canadian view on this m a t t e r of joint r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . k > ... 'I; I. However, at the moment it was not possible t o ' f o r e s e e all the p o s s i b l e contingencies. It would be unfortunate, in his view, if a governmental statement made p r i o r to knowledge of all the r e l e v a n t facts w e r e , by accident, t o impose r e s t r a i n t s which might not be d e s i r a b l e upon the Canadian and United States negotiators. M r . Fleming said he thought it should be understood that t h e r e was a r e a l distinction between the p r o c e d u r e s r e f e r r e d to in the statement and the actual details of operations in particularXemergency situations, i . e . , the actual firing of the weapons. It was not intended that governmental control should be e x e r c i s e d in such a way in an e m e r g e n c y as to impose delay on e s s e n t i a l operations General Foulkes said that the operational p r o c e d u r e s which would have to be worked out would be complicated and he would hope it would be possible for s e c u r i t y r e a s o n s to avoid spelling them out in a public document. These p r o - c e d u r e s w e r e being examined by the s e r v i c e a u t h o r i t i e s concerned. Some 4 000148 �SECRET APPENDEC:"A" Page 4. NORAD p r o c e d u r e s a l r e a d y a g r e e d upon would be subject to change in the future. M r . Dulles suggested that p e r h a p s the p h r a s e "from t i m e to t i m e " might be i n s e r t e d after "approved" in o r d e r to p e r m i t changes in p r o c e d u r e s which might prove d e s i r a b l e with e x p e r i e n c e . M r . Fleming suggested that the words "in advance" should also be included at the s a m e point in the s e n t e n c e , and the relevant p h r a s e would read "NORAD's operations approved in advance from time to time by the two G o v e r n m e n t s . " M r . McElroy said the i m p r e s s i o n was left in h i s mind by the sentence a s a whole that the Canadian Government control would apply to United States forces "from Mexico on u p " . control of CINC CONAD. C e r t a i n of t h e s e f o r c e s , in fact, came under the M r . Fleming said t h e r e was no thought of applying Canadian Government control to these United States f o r c e s . M r . P e a r k e s said that the Canadian statement w a s , however, w r i t t e n having in mind United States i n t e r c e p t o r forces based in Canada to which of c o u r s e Canadian control would apply. The Canadian Government had to b e a r in mind as well weapons based in the United States but firing into Canadian a i r s p a c e . M r . Dulles said that if intercontinental ballistic m i s s i l e s w e r e to be developed in due c o u r s e they would fly over many countries and the United States would not wish to have to get approval from each country over which they m i g h t i l y . i M r . Smith said that the Canadian Government was concerned p r i m a r i l y in t h i s statement with defensive weapons. M r . McElroy said that of c o u r s e the United States would r e g a r d even intercontinental ballistic m i s s i l e s as defensive weapons. He went on to ask if the statement was meant to cover the use of MB-1 a i r - t o - a i r n u c l e a r r o c k e t s . M r . P e a r k e s said that it was intended that the statement should cover M B - l ' s . He r e f e r r e d , for e x a m p l e , to the p h r a s e in p a r a g r a p h 3 " c e r t a i n defensive nuclear w a r h e a d s " . M r . Irwin said that it might appear from the p r e s e n t draft that r e f e r e n c e was being made in p a r a g r a p h 3 only to the BOMARC and the LACROSSE weapons. ...5 000149 �/ SECRET APPENDIX "A" - P a g e 5 . M r . Smith said that it was not the Canadian intention to p r e s s at t h i s / meeting for definitive approval of the text which had been submitted. Perhaps it would be b e s t in the c i r c u m s t a n c e s if, after further consideration on both s i d e s , r e v i s e d drafts might be exchanged. M r . McElroy said that some of the difficulty for him a r o s e from the fact that the statement included r e f e r e n c e not only to weapons coming under NORAD's control, but a l s o to the LACROSSE. It might p e r h a p s be e a s i e r if the statement dealt p r i m a r i l y with weapons to come under NORAD's operational c o n t r o l . He a p p r e c i a t e d , h o w e v e r , that the Canadian Government might wish to have mention made of the LACROSSE in the same s t a t e m e n t . M r . Smith said that he thought the Canadian Government would wish to deal with both the BOMARC and the LACROSSE at the s a m e t i m e in a public s t a t e m e n t . Mr. P e a r k e s emphasized that the wording of p a r a g r a p h 10 should be considered simply a s a b a s i s for an announcement in P a r l i a m e n t r a t h e r than as the t e r m s of an i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l a g r e e m e n t . ') The BOMARC and the LACROSSE w e r e much in the minds of the Canadian public because of the G o v e r n m e n t ' s announcements in September 1958. The public would expect them to be dealt with at one and the same t i m e . F o r m a l i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l unde r sta ndings would of c o u r s e have t o be r e a c h e d eventually. He expected that s e p a r a t e a g r e e m e n t s would be r e q u i r e d for each of the weapon s y s t e m s . The Govern- ment would however with to say something to P a r l i a m e n t on the subject in the n e a r future. M r . Dulles said he a g r e e d with M r . Smith's suggestion that each side might attempt its own redraft of the proposed statement for further c o n s i d e r a tion. He did not believe that t h e r e was any difference between the two governm e n t s on m a t t e r s of p r i n c i p l e in t h i s context. ... 6 �SECRET APPENDIX "A" - P a g e 6. Mr.- McElroy said he p r e s u m e d that in any public statement the Canadian Government would wish to cover possible r e q u i r e m e n t s for MB-1 a i r - t o - a i r r o c k e t s and nuclear depth c h a r g e s for naval u s e . a g r e e d that t h i s was the c a s e . Mr. Pearkes He hoped a s well t h a t the d i s c u s s i o n s which w e r e going on between Canadian and United States r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s with r e s p e c t to operational p r o c e d u r e s in t h e s e v a r i o u s fields could be p r e s s e d with all possible d e s p a t c h . Mr• Dulles asked when the Canadian Government would wish to make a statement to P a r l i a m e n t concerning the acquisition of nuclear weapons, M r . Smith said that he believed the Government would wish to make a statement e a r l y in the new s e s s i o n of P a r l i a m e n t which was likely to begin t o w a r d s the l a t t e r p a r t Of J a n u a r y . Jt was a g r e e d by the meeting that t h e r e s e e m e d to be no difference Of principle between Canadian and United States views on the m a t t e r of the control to be e x e r c i s e d over the use of n u c l e a r weapons, but that some further redrafting of the proposed Canadian s t a t e m e n t might be in o r d e r to reflect the points of view e x p r e s s e d at this m e e t i n g . 000151 � 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 CDNW00247 Title A name given to the resource Extract from Canada-United States Meeting on Joint Defence - Record of Meeting of December 15, 1958 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 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 15-Dec-58