https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/3b796aa07fe94a8cfdb52c1d0d5cf493.pdf 8020606d821ba749d5676dd65a21857e PDF Text Text k p Paraphrase " 1 / not required. No unclassified SECRET r^c / j § e p l y SEP or reference * B 8 w RH *B3 FM EXTERNAL OTT SEF<S/<$3 SECRET REFtRIOTO. TO NATOpjTRlS D L U 5 6 OPIMMED FILE f.ir.'OTO *>UL/fC <?/? *'/ INFO CCOS TT DM/DND FM CCOS FOR MTG AM SEP9 REF YOURTELS 177C SEP3 AND J792 SEP4 DRAFT ATOMIC INFO AGREEMENT THE DRAFT AGREEMENT TABLED BY THE USA DEL APPEARS TO EE SIMILAR IN ESSENTIALS TO THE 1955 AGREEMENT AND THERE SHOULD BE NO RFT NO GREAT DIFFICULTY IN REACHING AGREEMENT ON A TEXT ACCEPTABLE TO ALL NATO MEMBERS*THE DEL SHOULD BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THIS MATTER ON THE BASIS OF REGULAR INSTRUCTIONS FROM OTT AND WE THEREFORE DO NOT RPT NOT INTEND TO SEND EITHER LEGAL OR SECURITY EXPFRTS* DETAILED COMMENTS AS FOLLOWS HAVE BEEN PREPARED BY LEGAL AND DL2 n. V A DIVS AND DND FOR USE OF CDN REPS AT WORKING GROUP MTG ON SEP9. CDDND COMMENTS; ART II OF THE DRAFT WHICH IS ESSEN- TIALLY ART I OF 1955 AGREEMENT AND WHICH PROVIDES BASIS UPON WHICH INFO WILL EE GIVEN HAS BEEN AMENDED BY THE ADDITION OF THE WORDS QUOTE AND OTHER MILITARY APPLICATIONS OF ATOMIC ENERGY UNQUOTE AT THE END OF EACH CLAUSE AND THE ADDITION OF A NEW CLAUSE "D* CONCERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF DELIVERY SYSTEMS,THE EFFECT OF THESE CHANGES IS TO BROADEN THE BASIS UPON WHICH THE USA GOVT WILL DIVULGE ATOMIC INFO,PARA,ARTICLE II OF 1955 AGREEMENT CONTAINED RESTRICTIONS ON THE DISSEMINATION EY A RECIPIENT OF INFO OBTAINED UNDER THE AGREEMENT.THESE PROVISIONS ARE CARRIED FORWARD INTO ARTICLES IV AND V OF THE DRAFT*IT WILL BE NOTED THAT INFO RECEIVED BY MEMBER &gyrs> SECRET C/)/W. 4n y: 000367 «** J^-*w �CFPDFT OLvttL I ii^- AP Paraphrase n U not required. N o unclassified reply or reference. ^ PAGE TWO DL1156 STATES FROM NATO CAN ONLY BE GIVEN TO PERSONS WHERE THERE IS WHAT AMOUNTS TO A QUOTE. NEED TO KNOW REQUIREMENT UNQUOTEo I NFO SO RECEIVED OR OTHERWISE UNDER THE AGREEMENT CANNOT EE TRANSFERRED TO UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS OR PERSONS BEYOND THE JURISDICTION OF THE RECIPIENT MEMBER NATION*INFO CAN BE TRANSMITTED TO NATO BUT NOT RPT NOT TO OTHER MEMBER STATES EXCEPT WITH THE AUTHORITY OF THE USA, PARA.THE OBLIGATION OF REPORTING AS CONTAINED IN PARA TWO OF ARTICLE IV OF 1955 AGREEMENT IS NOW CONTAINED IN SECTION VI OF THE SECURITY ANNEX WHERE IT IS DESCRIBED IN SOMEWHAT GREATER DETAIL*PARA„ ARTICLE VX OF THE DRAFT CONTAINS A NEW PROVISION WHICH PURPORTS TO PROTECT THE STATE PROVIDING INFO UNDER THE AGREEMENT,UNDER THIS ARTICLE THE RECIPIENT STATE TAKES AND USES THE INFO AT ITS OWN RISK«THE ARTICLE IS INCLUDED AS ARTICLE V OF THE CDN-USA EILATERAL AGREEMENT ON COOPERATION ON THE USES OF ATOMIC ENERGY FOR MUTUAL DEFENCE PURPOSES,PARA.ARTICLE VII OF THE DRAFT PROVIDES FOR THE COMMUNICATION OF INFO BY OTHER MEMBER STATES AND READS IN PART 5 QUOTE PARALLELLING THE UNDERTAKINGS OF THE USA« O0 T0 THE EXTENT THEY DEEM NECESSARY WILLCUNDERLINFDJCOMMUNICATEae,UNQUOTE, APPARENTLY THIS IS AN ENDEAVOUR ON THE PART OF THE USA TO ENSURE THAT OTHER MEMBER STATES HAVING AN ATOMIC WEAPONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME WILL ALSO MAKE INFO AVAILABLEoPARA.ARTICLE IXC3) OF THE DRAFT PROVIDES FOR THE TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT* THE FORMULA ADOFTED IN THE 1955 AGREEMENT WAS TO MAKE THE AGREEMENTS TERM COINCIDE WITH THAT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY,THE PRESENT DRAFT PROVIDES FOR TERMINATION BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT OR BY THE AGREEMENT BEING SUPERSEDED,NOTWITHSTANDING TERMINATE ONsHOWEVER9PARTIES REMAIN SECRET 000368 �CCPDCT OLLrKLl *** ^u. A P Paraphrase n\J not r e q u i r e d . No unclassified reply or reference. PAGE THREE DL1156 UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO SAFEGUARD INFO OBTAINED PURSUANT TO THE AGREEMENT.PARA,NO RPT NO PROVISION IS MADE IN THE FRESENT DRAFT FOR THE ACCESSION OF A NEW STATE TO NATO,IT MAY BE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE VII(23AS CONTAINED IN THE 1955 AGREEMENT WERE INSERTED WITH A VIEW TO THE FEDERAL RFPUBLIC OF GERMANY JOINING NATO AND ARE NOT RPT NOT NOW CONSIDERED NECESSARY.THE FACT THAT THE PROVISION NO RPT NO LONGER EXISTS SHOULD NOT RPT NOT PRESENT ANY REAL DIFFICULTIES SHOULD THE PROBLEM ARISE.PARA.ARTICLE X OF THE DRAFT MERELY BRINGS INFO COMMUNICATED UNDER THE 1955 AGREEMENT . * P« .. - • * • "•'.-. WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE DRAFT:AGREEMENT.PARA,IN THE TECHNICAL ANNEX WHICH WAS CALLED THE SECRET ANNEX TO THE 1955 AGREEMENT AN ITEM INCLUDED IN THE EARLIER AGREEMENT HAS NOT RPT NOT BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD.THIS IS ITEM 2CINTERCHANGEABILITY OF NUCLEAR COMPONENTS).ITEM?(INTELLIGENCE-SOVIET CAPABILITIES OF THE 1955 AGREEMENT WOULD NOW APPEAR TO EE COVERED BY ITEM E OF THE TECHNICAL ANNEX.IN OTHER RESPECTS THE TECHNICAL ANNEX IS MORE COMPREHENSIVE. PARA.THE MEANING OF THE EXPRESSION QUOTE NO INFO ON OTHER MILITARY APPLICATIONS OF ATOMIC ENERGY..cUNQUOTE AS USED IN SECTION 2 OF THE TECHNICAL ANNEX IS NOT RPT NOT UNDERSTOODoTHIS IS PARTICULARLY SO HAVING REGARD TO THE AMENDMENTS REFERRED TO ABOVE IN PARA6 CONCERNING ARTICLE II OF THE DRAFT WHERE THE SAME EXPRESSION IS USED lEo OTHER MILITARY APPLICATIONS OF ATOMIC ENERGY.PARA.THE SECGEN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPERVISION OF THE. NATO SECURITY PROGRAMME WITH RESPECT TO ALL NATO ORGANI2ATIONSCINCLUDING UNITS IN NATO)WHICH RECEIVE INFO UNDER THE AGREEMENT.PARA C OF SECTION I OF THE SEC- SECRET 000369 �SECRET k f\ Paraphrase " V not required. No unclassified reply or reference. vj PAGE FOUR DLU56 URITY ANNEX REFERS.IT WILL ALSO BE NOTED THAT THIS FARA APPARENTLY CONTEMPLATES THE POSSIBILITY OF MFMBER STATES RETAINING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE SUPERVISION OF SECURITY OVER THEIR OWN MILITARY UNITS RECEIVING SUCH INFO BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE NO RPT NO FURTHER PROVISION AS TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OR ARRANGEMENTS NECESSARY FOR SUCH RETENTION OF RESPONSIBILITY.IT WILL EE NECESSARY TO CLEARLY DEFINE RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THIS SXTUATXON.PARA. UNDER PARA A OF SECTION X OF THE SECURITY ANNEX THE SECGEN IS CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF HAVING CONDUCTED SECURITY INSPECTIONS BY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL OR AGENCY DESIGNATED BY HIM, AT LEAST ONCE EVERY TWELVE MONTHS,OF ALL NATO MILITARY AND CIVILIAN ELEMENTS AND MEMBER NATIONS WHICH HAVE RECEIVED USA ATOMIC INFO.PARA.THE FIRST PARA OF ^SECTION IX CONCERNING f H E I G H T OF USA SECURITY WORKING GROUPS TO EXAMINE THE SECURITY MEASURES OF NATO AGENCIES AND MEMBER NATIONS IS SOMEWHAT AMBIGUOUS IN THAT IT IS NOT RPT NOT CLEAR WHETHER THIS RIGHT CAN BE EXERCISED PRIOR TO THE RECEIPT OF ATOMIC INFO OR SUBSEQUENT TO SUCH RECEIFT. HOWEVERjIN THE CASE OF CDA SUCH VISITS ARE IN FACT CONTEMPLATED IN ^ THE BILATERAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CDA AND THE USA*THE WORKING GROUP SH©ULD EXAMINE JUST HOW THESE VARIOUS INSPECTIONS AND SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES WILL BE CARRIED OUT.PARA,FARA F OF SECTION I LIMITS DISSEMINATION OF INFO TO NATIONS OF MEMBER STATES ON A NEED TO KNOW BASIS.THIS MEANS THAT REGARDLESS OF SECURITY CLEARANCES HELD NON-NATIONAL MEMBERS OF A FORCE COULD NOT RPT NOT BE ALLOWED ACCESS TO SUCH INFO.WHILE THIS MIGHT RAISE PRACTICAL PRO- BLEMS,THE PRINCIPLE INVOLVED HERE WAS RECOGNIZED IN PARA2 OF SECRET ' �r/\QCT oLV/f\L I C c *^-" A P Paraphrase HV/ not r e q u i r e d . No unclassified reply or reference, PAGE FIVE DL115S ARTICuE VI OF THE 1955 AGREEMENT.IN THIS RESPECT THF. WORD QUOTE NATIONALS UNQUOTE SHOULD BE DEFINED,SOME COUNTRIES LIMIT THE WORD NATIONAL TO QUOTE NATURAL»BORN UNQUOTE CITIZENS AND OTHERS INCLUDE NATURALIZED CITIZENS.FARA.THIS AGREEMENT DOES NOT RPT NOT MENTION PATENTS OR ANY AGREEMENTS CONCERNING THEM.NORMALLY AN AGREEMENT TO INTERCHANGE TECHNICAL INFO SHOULD CONTAIN PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE PROTECTION OF PROPRIETARY RIGHTS IN THE INFO. THE WORKING GROUP ON INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY OF NATO SAC/9ii)IS AT PRESENT CONSIDERING AN AGREEMENT TO COVER SITUATIONS OF THIS TYPE. IT WOULD APPEAR FROM THE TECHNICAL ANNEX THAT MUCH OF THE INFO TO BE EXCHANGED IS OF AN OPERATIONAL NATURE RATHER THAN TECHNICAL DETAILS OF THE WEAPONS OR DETAILS OF MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUESo INFO OF AN OPERATIONAL NATURE SELDOM DISCLOSES PATENTABLE SUBJECT MATTER.THE MOST PRACTICAL SUGGESTION IS TO RAISE THE QUESTION OF PATENT PROTECTION AT THE FORTHCOMING MTG OF THF WORKING GROUP. •x- IT MIGHT ALSO BE RECOMMENDED THAT THE PROCEDURES BEING CONSIDERED BY THE WORKING GROUP ON INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY COULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE SECURITY ANNEX BY REFERENCE. (2iEXTERNAL AFFAIRS^SECURITY);WE HAVE EXAMINED THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT AS GIVEN IN CMC63)63 OF JUL22/63 WITH RESPECT TO THE SECURITY ASPECTS AND FIND THAT9WHILE THERE ARE NOT RPT NOT MANY BASIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN IT AND THE EXISTING AGREEMENT,THERE ARE IN THE SECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCEDURES SOME WHICH COULD CAUSE A BIT OF DIFFICULTY DEPENDING ON THE MANNER AND EXTENT TO WHICH TKEY ARE IMPLEMENTEDoTHE DRAFT IS MORE DETAILED AND MORE SPECIFIC CONCERNING SECURITY AFFECTING THE EXCHANGE OF ATOMIC SECRET 000371 �or pppT OLlrKL 1 kf\ Paraphrase n\j not required. No unclassified reply or reference, o PAGE SIX DL1156 INFO THAN IS THE PRESENT AGREEMENT;AS THE PROPOSALS ARE DESCRIBED IN CMC 63) <S3 THEY DO NOT RPT NOT SUGGEST ANYTHING TO WHICH WE COULD NOT RPT NOT AGREE IN THE LIGHT OF OUR EXPERIENCE SO FAR*PARA. THE NEW RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE NATO SECGEN WXLL NECESSITATE PROCEDURES ADDITIONAL TO THOSE PRESENTLY OBTAINING UNDER NATO, WHICH AS RECIPIENTS,WE SHALL BE BOUND TO FOLLOW,GIVEN OUR PRESENT SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS,THE NEW PROCEDURES SHOULD NOT RPT N©T PROVE IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCEPT NOR WOULD THEY EE PARTICULARLY ONEROUS IN APPLICATION AS THEY ARE OUTLINED IN THE SPECIAL SECURITY ANNEX OF CMC63563.FARA.MORE SPECIFICALLY,IN THE ANNEX THERE SHOULD BE NO RPT NO GREAT DIFFICULTY ABOUT THE CLEARANCES MENTIONED XN SECTION II € PARTS D AND EJAND EXISTING FACILITIES FOR STORAGE AND PROTECTION SHOULD MEET THE PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN SECTION III.THE PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE DOCUMENTS CESPECIALLY UP TO CONFIDENTIAL AS IN SECTION IV,E,2)WILL HAVE TO BE AS RIGIDLY CONTROLLED AS HAS BEEN THE CASE WITH NATO DOCUMENTS, r Y WITH RESPONSIBILITIES CLEARLY PLACED,UNDERSTOOD AND ACCEPTED BY ALL CONCERNED OR THE POSSIBILITY OF LAXITY AND CONFUSION COULD BE REAL.THAT HOWEVER IS A MATTER TO EE HANDLED IN OTTAWA.OUR MAIN FEAR ARISES FROM THE INSPECTIONS PROPOSED IN SECTIONS IX AND X. WE CANNOT RPT NOT OBJECT TO THEM AS SSUCH FOR WE HAVF ACCEPTED THEM IN CONNECTION WITH NATO SECURITY.THE PURVIEW OF THE PROPOSED INSPECTION ISjWE HAVE NOTED,QUITE GENERALLY PHRASED BUT ZEALOUS SECURITY WORKING GROUPS MIGHT SEEK TO PROBE INTO ASPECTS OF OUR SECURITY ADMIN MORE DEEPLY THAN WE COULD PERMIT.WITHIN THE LIMITS WHICH HAVE CHARACTERIZED THE INSPECTIONS OF NATO DOCUMENT HANDLING SECRET 000372 �CCPDCT OLlrKL I ^^ 7^ A P Paraphrase MWr not required. No unclassified reply or reference, PAGE SEVEN DLU56 PROCEDURES WE COULD AGREE WITHOUT DIFFICULTY. C3)EXTERNAL AFFAIRSCLEGAL):PREAMBLE,THIRD PARA.IN THE SENTENCE QUOTE...MAKING AVAILABLE TO THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION AND ITS MEMBER NATIONS*..UNQUOTE SUBSTITUTE QUOTEo..MEMBER STATES UNQUOTE,ALREADY,AT THE TIME OF NEGOTIATING THE 1955 AGREEMENT WHICH THIS ONE PURPORTS TO REPLACE,THERE HAO EEEN SOME HESITATION AEOUT IDENTIFYING NATO AS AN ENTITY DISTINCT FROM ITS MEMBERS BUT THIS FORM OF LANGUAGE WAS FINALLY AGREED TO.IN THE PRESENT CONTEXT HOWEVER THE CONTRAST IS MORE APPARENT AND IT WOULD BE SOFTENED BY THE USE OF THE WORD QUOTE STATE UNQUOTE WHICH CARRIES THE NOTATION OF FULL SOVEREIGNTY0PARA0FREAMBLE,FOURTH FARA.QUOTE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE USA ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF J954...UNQUOTE,ALREADY IN THE 1955 AGREEMENT IT WAS NOT RPT NOT TOO CLEAR TO WHAT EXTENT THIS CONSIDERATION WAS RELEVANT TO THE ARTICLES NOW NO VII)WHEREBY OTHER STATES THAN THE USA UNDERTAKE TO MAKE SOME OF THEIR OWN INFO AVAILABLE.DELETION OF THIS PARA OR ITS ENLARGEMENT TO COVFR PARALLEL LEGISLATION IN OTHER COUNTRXES,1E.FOR CDA,THE CDN ATOMIC ENERGY CONTROL ACT AND ATOMIC ENERGY REGULATIONS,WOULD EE IN KEEPING WITH THE MULTILATERAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT.THIS RAISES THE WIDER QUESTION,NOT RPT NOT SOLVED IN EITHER PARAS THREE OR TEN -\y OF THE MEMO FROM THE USA DEL,OF THE LEGAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ' THIS AGREEMENT AND THE BILATERAL AGREEMENTS SUCH AS WAS CONCLUDED [ * BETWEEN CDA AND THE USA IN 1955CCTS 1955/16).THE CATEGORIES OF INFO WHICH THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT PROVIDES FOR ARE INDEED WIDER $ THAN THOSE SHOWN XN THOSE AGREEMENTS AND THE LANGUAGE,EG. OF ARTICLE IV^FARA FIVE QUOTE MEMEER NATIONS AGREE THAT ATOMIC SECRET X f. fs- . 000373" *A« �SECRET A A Paraphrase " v not required. No unclassified reply or reference. PAGE EIGHT DL.U56 INFO0..WXLL NOT RPT NOT BE TRANSFERRED TO UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS GR BEYOND THE JURISDICTION OF THE RECIPIENT MEMEER NATIONS... UNQUOTE WAS LIFTED FROM THE BILATERAL AGREEMENTS.ARTICLE I. CAJTHE CLAUSE ON THE SEVENTH LINE QUOTE WHILE MAKING SUCH CONTRl= EUTIONS UNQUOTE IS REDUDDANT FOR IT MERELY REPEATS THE CLAUSE ON THE THIRD AND FOURTH LINE QUOTE WHILE THE NATO CONTINUES TO MAKE 0..CONTRIBUTIONS UNQUOTE,CB)THE ANTECEDENT OF QUOTE SUCH COOPERATION UNQUOTE IN THE PENULTIMATE LINE IS NOT RPT NOT CLEAR.(C)THE WORDING IN THE PENULTIMATE LINE QUOTE WILL FROMOTE AND WILL NOT RPT NOT CONSTITUTE AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO ITS DEFENCE AND SECURITY UNQUOTE IS VAGUE,ARE THESE CRITERIA DISTINGUISHABLE70NE WOULD THINK THAT IF AN ACT CONSTITUTED AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO THF DEFENCE OF THE USA IT COULD HARDLY BE UAID TO PROMOTE THAT DEFENCE. THIS WORDING SHOULD BE CLARIFIED.ARTICLF XX.IS QUOTE IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR FUNCTIONS RELATED TO NATO MISSIONS...UNQUOTE COMMEN= SURATE WITH THE MUTUAL SECURITY AND DEFENCE PURPOSES MENTIONED IN THE CDA-USA BILATERAL?THE EXPRESSION QUOTE NATO MISSIONS UNQUOTE WHICH IS USED ON THE FIFTH LINE DOES NOT RPT NOT SEEM TO BE DEFINED ANYWHERE XN THE AGREEMENT.ARTICLE III.THIS SECTION DUPLICATES FIRST SENTENCE OF ARTICLE I AND IS AMBIGUOUSoIT SUGGESTS THAT THE USA WILL CARRY OUT THIS AGREEMENT ONLY IN SO FAR9AND AS LONGgAS IT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH USA LAW.THIS MAKES THE AGREEMENT DEPENDENT ON THE LEGISLATURE WHICH IS CLEARLY CONTRARY TO XNTERNATieNAL LAW.AN AG»EEMFNT CAN EE SO WORDED AS TO MAKE THE OBLIGATIONS ASSUMED UNDER IT CONSISTENT WITH DOMESTIC LAW BUT IT IS IMPROPER TO WORD IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT FIXED OBLIGATIONS WILL ONLY EE SECRET �y CFTDFT OLV/F\L I , A P Paraphrase HV/ not r e q u i r e d . ;* No unclassified reply or reference, PAGE NINE DL1156 IMPLEMENTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DOMESTIC LAW*IN OTHER WORDS THE OBLIGATIONS ONCE CREATED ARE ABSOLUTE AT INTERNATIONAL LAW AND A FAILURE BY THE LEGISLATURE TO IMPLEMENT THEM IS NOT RPT NOT A DEFENCE,ARTICLE IV PARA FIVE.THERE SHOULD BE A DEFINITION OF THE TERM QUOTE AUTHORIZED PERSONS UNQUOTE AS IN ARTICLE It OF THE 1955 AGREEMENT,OTHERWISE THE WORDING QUOTE UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS UNQUOTE REMAINS VAGUEoARTXCLE VIoTHE FIRST PART OF THE SENTENCE IS SUPERFLUOUS AND AMBIGUOUS.ARTICLE X^CIKTHSS SECTION TALKS ABOUT NOTIFICATION FROM STATES THAT THEY AGREE TO BE POUND BY THE AGREEMENT.THIS PROCEDURE IS NORMALLY CALLED RATIFICATION AND WE WONDER WHY IT IS NOT RPT NOT SO DESCRIBED.ARTICLE IXC 3).THE *«T" — _ EXPRESSION QUOTE MUTUAL AGREEMENT UNQUOTE PROBABLY MEANS UNANIMOUS AGREEMENTS THIS WHAT IS DESIRED?FXNAL CLAUSESoTHXS IS AN AGREEMENT EETWEEN QUOTE GOVTS UNQUOTE RATHER THAN QUOTE STATES UNQUOTE AND THE F©RMIR WORD SHOULD ?F SUBSTITUTED FOR THE LATTER.THE ONLY WAY AT LEAST IN THEORY TO BXND A STATE RATHER THAN ITS GOVT IS TO DRAFT THE TREATY IN HEAD OF STATE FORM ROBERTSON'° Q e 0122 SEP 63 SECRET 000375 � 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 CDNW04924 Title A name given to the resource External to NATOParis DL1156 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 06-Sep-63 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived NATO Agreement for Cooperation Regarding Atomic Information, RG24-B-1, vol. 21471, CSC 2108-1-AC-228, Library and Archives Canada (LAC). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Department of National Defence Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Canadian Crown Subject The topic of the resource NATO, nuclear weapons Description An account of the resource Draft Atomic Info Agreement 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