https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/79821e9668a9077b34f7980a7ee65c57.pdf b6df83823a6a58c593c6b13b8659c299 PDF Text Text 7' NATOPARIS -".PR23/5S SECRET ^ E X T E R N A L 8 3 3 PRIORITY INFO LDN WASHDC BONN ROME PRIORITY CSC/15 . y* o f\\m 0M .•.•-•-•TO Ji? / ^ ^ REF ROME TEL 132 APR17 IRBMS IN ITALY IN PRIVATE SESSION OF NATO COUNCIL ON APR22 THE ITALIAN REP MADE A STATEMENT ON THE CONCLUSION OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ITALY AND THE USA ON IRBM SITES IN ITALY. 2.HE SAID THAT,SINCE IT I S A BILATERAL AGREEMENT,THE ITALIAN GOVT DID NOT RPT NOT CONSIDER IT NECESSARY TO DEPOSIT THE AGREEMENT WITH THE SECRETARIAT.HOWEVER,HE S A I D , I T I S ONLY FAIR THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD BE BROUGHT UP TO DATE ON THE CONTENTS OF THE AGREEMENT.HE THEN SAID HE WOULD READ THE TWO PARAS WHICH ARE MOST IMPORTANT FROM THE NATO POINT OF VIEW. 3.PARA3 WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT,IN VIEW OF THE DECISION TO PLACE IRBMS AT THE DISPOSAL OF SHAPE IN EUROPE AS A MEANS OF IMPLEMENTING NATO COLLECTIVE DEFENCE PLANS,IT HAD BEEN AGREED TO STATION IRBMS IN ITALY.THESE WOULD BE UNDER THE OPERATIONAL CONTROL OF SACEUR IN PEACE AND IN WAR.A DECISION TO LAUNCH THE MISSILES WOULD BE TAKEN BY SACEUR ONLY AFTER AGREEMENT BY THE ITALIAN AND THE USA GOVTS.THIS AGREEMENT WOULD BE GIVEN IN THE LIGHT OF THE PREVAILING CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN CONFORMITY WITH ARTICLE 5 OF THE NATO TREATY. 4„PARA4,THE MEANING OF WHICH WE WERE UNABLE TO GET ENTIRELY CLEAR FROM THE ORAL PRESENTATION,APPARENTLY COVERS COMMAND ARRANGEMENTS. THE ITALIAN REP SPOKE OF COMMAND OF THE IRBM UNITS BEING IN THE HANDS OF THE RESPONSIBLE ITALIAN COMMAND UNDER SHAPE.HOWEVER,HE ALSO SPOKE OF COMMAND BEING EXERCISED BY AN AMERICAN OFFICER. 5.WE WILL SHORLY BE IN A POSITION TO TELEGRAPH THE TEXT OR THE SUBSTANCE OF BOTH PARAS ACCURATELY.IN THE MEANTIME,WE SHOULD ADD THAT THE ITALIAN REP COMMENTED ON PARA4 TO THE EFFECT THAT A NUMBER OF AMERICAN OFFICERS AND SOLDIERS WOULD BE GIVING THE ITALIANS INSTRUCTIONS IN THE USE OF THE MISSILES AND,APPARENTLY IN THIS CONNECTION,WOULD BE ABLE TO USE THEM.AT THE SAME TIME,THE MISSILES THEMSELVES WOULD BE IN THE HANDS OF ITALIAN OFFICERS AND PERSONNEL. 000500 9 H? �PAGE TWO U3o 60THE ITALIAN REP BRIEFLY OUTLINED THE PASSAGE OF THE AGREEMENT THROUGH THE ITALIAN PARLIAMENT,COVERED BY ROME'S REF TEL, EMPHASIZING THAT,APART FROM THE COMMUNISTS,EVEN THE OPPOSITION PARTIES WERE IN THE END PREPARED TO ACCEPT THE AGREEMENT. 7.HE STATED THAT,SINCE THE IRBM SITES CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ITALIAN ARMY AND OF ITALIAN SECURITY AND SINCE THE AGREEMENT ON IRBMS IS IN IMPLEMENVATION OF COLLECTIVE DEFENCE AS PRESCRIBED BY THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY,THE ITALIAN GOVT DOES NOT RPT NOT FEEL UNDER ANY OBLIGATION TO PLACE THE TEXT OF THE AGREEMENT ON THE DESKS OF MEMBERS OF THE ITALIAN PARLIAMENT. 8.THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION OF HOW,IN THE LIGHT OF THIS STATEMENT AND THE PREVIOUS STATEMENT REPORTED IN PARA2 ABOVE, PERM REPS MIGHT SEE THE RELEVANT ARTICLES OF THE AGREEMENT IN WRITING.IT WAS FINALLY ACCEPTED THAT THE ITALIAN PERMREP WOULD WRITE A PERSONAL LET TO THE SECGEN IN WHICH HE WOULD ENCLOSE THE TERMS OF THE TWO PARAS IN QUESTION.THESE WOULD BE MADE AVAILABLE TO INTERESTED DELS WHO COULD MAKE NOTES ON THEM.THE LET, OR AT ANY RATE ITS ENCLOSURE,WOULD THEN BE RETURNED TO THE ITALIAN PERMREP.THIS WAS THE FURTHEST THAT THE ITALIAN REP FELT HE COULD GO IN VIEW OF THE PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE,FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF HIS GOVT,OF NOT RPT NOT BEING ACCUSED OF MAKING AVAILABLE TO NATO GOVTS TEXTSWHICH HAD NOT RPT NOT BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THE ITALIAN PARLIAMENT. 9.IN GENERAL DISCUSSION,THE USA REP PRAISED THE AGREEMENT AS"A COMPLETE ANSWER"TO THE QUESTION FREQUENTLY ENCOUNTERED IN THE USA AS TO WHY EUROPEAN COUNTRIES ARE NOT RPT NOT ACCEPTING IRBMS.HE ALSO PRAISED TH PASSAGE OF THE AGREEMENT THROUGH THE ITALIAN PARLIAMENT AND MR PELLA°S LEADERSHIP IN THIS. 10.THE BELGIAN EP SAID THE ITALIAN REP°S STATEMENT WAS VERY SIGNIFICANT AND THAT THE TWO PARAS IN QUESTION ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO NATO BECAUSE THEY WOULD PRESUMABLY SERVE AS A MODEL FOR OTHER AGREEMENTS . 11.1 THANKED THE ITALIAN REP FOR HIS STATEMENT AND AGREED WITH THE BELGIAN REP THAT THE TWO PARAS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO NATQ.THE FIRST �REASON FOR THIS IS THAT OTHER COUNTRIES MAY BE NEGOTIATING BILATERAL AGREEMENTS ON IRBMS AND IT WOULD BE UNFORTUNATE IF THE AGREEMENTS TURNED OUT TO BE DIFFERENT FROM ONE ANOTHER.THE SECOND REASON IS THAT IRBMS IN EUROPE INVOLVE THE ALLIANCE AS A WHOLE. FOR THIS REASON I WELCOMED THE REF IN THE AGREEMENT TO ARTICLE 5 OF THE TREATY. 12.1 SUGGESTED FURTHER THAT THE ITALIAN REPS STATEMENT DOES NOT RPT NOT REMOVE THE OBLIGATION RESTING ON SHAPE TO PROVIDE INFO ON IRBMS TO THE COUNCIL.PARTICULARLY SINCE COPEN,IT HAS BEEN EXPECTED THAT SACEUR WILL MAKE PROGRESS REPORTS ON THIS MATTER AND IT IS TO BE HOPED THAT THIS WILL BE PURSUED. 13.1 ADDED THAT I THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD ALL WISH TO RESERVE OUR POSITION ON THE USA-ITALIAN AGREEMENT IN CASE OUR GOVTS SHOULD WISH TO MAKE COMMENTS AT A LATER STAGE. 14.THE STANDING GROUP REP SAID THAT SACEUR RECOGNIZES HIS OBLIGATION TO MAKE PROGRESS REPORTS AND INTENDS TO MAKE FURTHER REPORTS. HE ALSO EXPRESSED THE WARM APPRECIATION OF THE NATO MILITARY AUTHORITIES FOR THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE ITALIAN GOVT.THE ACTING SECGEN ASSOCIATED HIMSELF WITH THIS LATTER STATEMENT AND SAID THE DECISION SHOWED COURAGE ON THE PART OF THE ITALIAN GOVT. 15.THE DANISH REP ENDORSED MY REMARKS ABOUT REFLECTION ON THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT.HE SAID THAT IT RAISES TWO IMPORTANT QUESTIONSTHE QUESTION OF WHO IS TO DECIDE ON THE USE OF IRBMS AND HOW SUCH A DECISION IS TO BE TAKEN,AND THE QUESTION OF THE EFFECT ON NATO OF BILATERAL AGREEMENTS ON MATTERS OF THIS KIND LEGER 000502 � 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 CDNW04108 Title A name given to the resource CDNW04108 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