https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/30427f795eb65eb46591a136b9176369.pdf abf46458425a96cfb320fb25ebea9017 PDF Text Text ! ""^ ^•• $ /59 SECRET ™r 5 9 36 h\y^ DC BONN EMBASSYPARIS OP If- . -^ /cJ^s E 891 MAY1 PROPOSED NATO PRESS RE] THROUGHOUT A LONG DISCUS NUCLEAR WEAPONS. N TO THE NIQUE ISSUED B .USATION AT NATO COUNTRIE FIND NEW MATERIA IT AS APPROPRIATEoIT IS TO MAKE A S RELEASE WOULD NOT RPT NOT A NOTES BUT IT WOULD TAKE C EE OF 2.SPAAK CONCEDED THAT THE TIMING OF MENTS ON NUCLEAR STOCKPILES IE WOULD "THE OTHER SIDE"WILL NOT RPT NOT I EARATIONS AND IN TO FEEL ANY SHAME ABOUT PROCEEDS 5.SPAAK WAS SUPPORTED BY GEN NORSTAE EHER PROGRESS REE WHICH WE RE \t IS POSSIBLE,DECLARE IENTIAL TO MOVE AHEAD I USING 5AfUK, FRANCE, GERM 1TED THS GENERAL THE GRF 000470 �PAGE TWO PRESS RELEASE TO THE STOCKPILE NEGOTlATIONSjHE SAID THIS IS NEEDED TO SMOOTH PASSAGE OF THE RELEVANT AGREEMENTS THROUGH C SS. ROBERTS SAID-IT IS A PITY WE HAVE TO TAKE A STEF WHICH CAN ' SEIZED ON BY THE RUSSIANS FOR PROPAGANDA PURPOSES.HOWEVER,HE THOUGHT IT CLEARLY PREFERABLE TO DEAL WITH SOVIET PROPAGANDA IN A SINGLE,COMBINED STATEMENT THAN TO ATTEMPT TO DO THE 5.VON WALTHER,THE NEW GERMAN REP,SAID IE HAD INSTRUCTIONS TO SAY THAT THE FEDERAL GOVT WELCOMES THE PROPOSED F .:E. IT WOULD HELP TO AVOID THE DIFFICULTIES BEING SOVIET PROP, GANDA WHICH, IN THIS FIELD,IS MOST SEVE' -iY.THE FEDERAL GOVT BELIEVES THAT THE LINE TO BE TAKEN RELEASE WOULD BE HELPFUL,BOTH INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY, TO'"> \L POSITION GERMANY IS ABOUT TO TAKE".(WE D SIGNIFICANCE IN THE LAST CRYPTIC PHRASE.WE HAVE REA 248 APR30 AND HAVE NOTED THE DIVERGENCE BETWEEN THE VIEW OF ETZDORF AND SCHERPENBERG AND THE INSTRUCTIONS RECEIVED T DAY BY VON WALTHER). 6.THE NETHERLANDS REP AGREED THA G IS EUNATE BUT WAS PREPARED TO ACCEPT IT.SARPER,THE T DOUBT THE RUSSIANS WOULD USE THE AGREE EPAGANDA P U E POSES BUT DID NOT RPT NOT REGRET THE TIMING.HE BELIEVES THAT 1 AGREEMENTS WILL ACTUALLY HAVE A SALUTARY EFFECT ON THE RUSSIANS AND THAT THEY WOULD NOT RPT NOT DISTURB THE ATMOSPHERE OF THE CONFERENCE ON ACCOUNT OF THEM. 7.THE BELGIAN REP EXPRESSED HIS PERSONAL AGRE TO ISSUEIA PRESS RELEASE ON THE I WITH THE PROPOSAL "HAT WE MUST CHOSE I EVIL BUT RESERVED HIS GOVTS POSITION. 8.GRAZZI,THE ITALIAN REP SYMPATHISED WITH THE ING OFF SOVIET PROPAGANDA BUT EDIATE CONSENT THE PR) CONSIDER NOT RPT NOT ONLY EXT- PT NOT GIVE H3 f HAS LSO II PROPAGANDA IN ITALY.HE THOUGHT PURPOSES OF SOVIET PROPAGANDA. 9.BOYESEN,THE NORWEGIAN REP,SAID TH/ 000471 �, PAGE THREE 393 THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO RPT NO PAUSE IN THE ORDERLY COMPLETION OF Nh.OS MILITARY PREPARATIONS.NEVERTHELESS,HIS GOVT CONSIDERS THE TABLING OF' THE AGREEMENTS,JUST AT THE TIME OF THE FOREIGN MINISTERS CONFERE NCE,SINGULARLY UNFORTUNATE.THE PUBLIC HAS HEARD VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE DECISIONS ON NUCLEAR -WARHEADS SINCE DEC/57. AND WILL THEREFORE INEVITABLY GAIN THE IMPRESSION THAT THERE. IS A PARTICULAR URGENCY ABOUT IMPLEMENTING THE DECISION NOW.THIS WILL BE SEIZED UPON BY RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA.HE VERY MUCH WISHED THAT THIS SITUATION COULD BE AVOIDED. 10.I SOUGHT TO ASCERTAIN IF IT WOULD NOT RPT NOT BE POSSIBLE TO POSTPONE THE DATE OF ISSUING THE STATEMENT. AND THE TIME OF TABLING THE AGREEMENTS IN CONGRESS.BURGESS SAID THAT,ALTHOUGH CONGRESS OFTEN SITS LATER THAN JUL15,IT WOULD BE ONLY PRUDENT TO SCHEDULE THE TABLING 60 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THAT DATE.SPAAK THOUGHT THAT THE PRESS RELEASE SHOULD BE ISSUED AS SOON AS THE CONSENT OF GOVTS HAS BEEN OBTAINED?}AND BURGESS FELT THE ONLY OTHER LIMITING FACTOR WOULD BE THE SIGNING OF THE AGREEMENTS WHICH HE EXPECTS WITHIN A FEW DAYS.BE COMMENTED THAT IT WOULD SEEM DESIRABLE TO ISSUE THE PRESS RELEASE AS FAR AS POSSIBLE IN ADVANCE OF MAY11 RATHER THAN DURING THE GENEVA CONFERENCE. 11.I CONCENTRATED MY SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT,BOTH IN GENERAL DISCUSSION AND IN DISCUSSION OF THE TEXT,ON THE REFS TO GENERAL DISARMAMENT, PARTICULARLY THOSE IN THE FINAL PARA.I CONTENDED THAT,WHEREAS THERE WAS GOOD REASON IN 1957 TO REFER IN NATO COMMUNIQUES TO GENERAL DISARMAMENT,IT IS INAPPROPRIATE TO FOCUS ATTENTION ON THIS NOW,THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE DISARMAMENT PICTURE SINCE 19579EG THE GENEVA DISCUSSIONS ON SURPRISE ATTACK AND NUCLEAR TESTS. AND THE CONSIDERATION WHICH HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE POSSIBILITIES OF ZONAL DISARMAMENT.IN ANY CASE GENERAL DISARMAMENT IS NOT RPT NOT BEING PREPARED FOR DISCUSSION AT GENEVA.TO SINGLE OUT FOR SPECIAL MENTION NOW OLD PASSAGES WHICH CONCENTRATE ON GENERAL DISARMAMENT COULD EASILY GIVE THE IMPRESSION WE ARE REVERTING, FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSIONS WITH THE RUSSIANS,TO OUR PREVIOUS POSITION.I THOUGHT THE LAST PARA AT LEAST OUGHT TO BE REPLACED • . • 4 °9 " °e 000472 �PAGE: FOUR E9G WITH SOMETHING MORE APPROPRIATE TO THE TIMES. 12*SPAAK SAID HE THOUGHT THE LAST TWO PARAS WOULD HAVE PLEASED US.IN ANY CASE NATO HAS NEVER WITHDRAWN FROM THE GENERAL POSITION THAT IT SEEKS GENERAL DISARMAMENT AND THAT IT IS PREPARED TO DISARM IN THIS CONTEXT!THEREFORE IT WOULD SEEM RIGHT TO-REPEAT THIS. TO HIS CONTENTION THAT GENERAL DISARMAMENT HAS EEEN UNDER" DISCUSSION SINCE 1957,1 REPLIEDnENTRE SOI".SOMEYHAT SURPRISINGLY ROBERTS SAID HE THOUGHT HIS GOVT WOULD RATHER WELCOME THE LAST TWO PARAS. AS SUPPORT FOR MY POSITION WAS NOT RPT NOT FORTHCOMING I FINALLY SAID I WOULD SUBMIT THE PARAS TO MY GOVT FOR CONSIDERATION,, 13.1 HAVE SUBSEQUENTLY LEARNED,! BELIEVE RELIABLY,THAT THESE PASSAGES FROM THE 1957 COMMUNIQUES WERE INCLUDED AT THE PARTICULAR REQUEST OF THE FOUR WHO EVIDENTLY FAVOURED PROJECTING THE IDEA OF GENERAL DISARMAMENT ONCE MORE INTO A POSITION OF SOME PROMINENCE,, 14.THE BALANCE OF THE DISCUSSION ON THE TEXT WAS LONG AND COMPLEX BUT I WILL REPORT ONLY A FEW INDICATIONS OF THE TREND OF NATIONAL THINKING.THE FRENCH AND THE TURKS WANTED TO BE MORE ERECT AND TO GIVE LESS APPEARANCE OF JUSTIFYING OUR POSITION VIS A VIS SOVIET PROPAGANDA.THE ITALIANS AND NORWEGIANS SAW NO RPT NO NEED FOR THE SECOND PARA WHICH,IN THE ORIGINAL DRAFT,GAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT NATO HAD JUST GOT A SPECIAL REPORT AND WAS SATISFIED WITH PROGRESS ACHIEVED.THE BRITISH,WHO THOUGHT IT IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN THE IMPRESSION THAT THE STATEMENT WAS PROMPTED BY SOVIET PROPAGANDA, ALSO PROPOSED THE PRESENTCREVISED5WORDING OF THE SECOND PARA, ROBERTS MADE THE FURTHER POINT•THAT,BECAUSE THE 60 DAY PROBLEM IS NOT EXPLAINED IN THE DRAFT,IT IS DOUBLY IMPORTANT TO PUT EMPHASISON THE ROUTINE CHARACTER OF THE ARRANGEMEtJTS, 15,BOYESEN WONDERED IF-'WE ARE NOT ON WEAK GROUND IN REFERRING TO AGREEMENTS WHOSE PROVISIONS THE COUNCIL HAS NOT STUDIED.THE USA INSISTED THAT THERE MUST BE SOME REF TO THE AGREEMENTS,BOYESEN THOUGHT THAT,.IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 1957 COMMUMKUEpTHEY SHOULD BE TABLED IN NATO LEGER ° ° " � 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 CDNW04101 Title A name given to the resource CDNW04101 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived "NATO Cooperation Regarding Nuclear Weapons And Missile Bases (IRBM)," RG24-B-1, vol 21468, file CSC 2108:1, part 2, 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