https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/711e0421d8da53f9f3cbf72a1933dbba.pdf 18f1389ea52d060beb2bdea960d80bbb PDF Text Text TO EXTERNAL 2361 PRIORITY ~~ INFO CCOS EMBPARIS LDN WASHDC_2.1,n.,RU YOURTEL DLUJ7 OCT9. :t p~]\ vrc~~~BERLIN CONTINIIENCYPLAIIN1N13 t:,L . .( ,,,, .. t,µr""' / ;J-r;y;f'/ -~,,,,, . --:1-,/ ~ (¼,~ .'fl'--= /f , --- COUNCILS DISCUSSICN IN RESTD SESSION OCT18 TOOK ACCOUNTO - 5 -,--· . ~;AS ~-- . UNFORTUNATE tHlS USEFUL SµMMARY OF TKE C -~ ---. . D ACCUMULATION'6 PAPER ON THIS SUBJECT HAD NOT RPT NOT BEK~--c-I-ffG.-IJLA TEO EARLIER.AS IT IS,DISCUSSION REMAINS.CONFUSED.NO RPT Nn--1DEe-t-.tU - HAVEBEENTAKEN.AFURTHERMTGWILL BE HILD OCT12,12. THE STANDING QROUPHAD NO RPf; NO REPLY TO OUR QUESTION ABOUT NUCLEARWEAPONS.THEREFOREI GAVETHE STATDIINT I SENT YOO IN MYTEL ~07 ocr,, INCORPORATINGBOTHTHE AMEND,MENTS YOU Sl:J'18ESTEDIN PARA! YOURRUTEL. THIS PRECIPITATED CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION.WE RECEIVED SUPPORTFROMNORWEGIANSAND BELGIA~S,BUT A NUMBEROF OTHERSARE OPPOSED.THEIR CHIEF OBJECTION IS TKATTO REQUEST THE EXCLUSIONOF THENUCLEARCONTINGENCY PLAN AT THIS,STAGEWOULD RE OPENA QUESTION WHICH VAS DEBATED PAINFULLYA_NDAT LENGTHA YEAR AGO IN COUNCIL.OTHERS UNDERSTAND OUROBJECTIONS VERYWELL;THE DIFFICULTY IS THEYDONOTRPT NOTSHAREOUR.VIEW.THEY POINT OUTTHATUSEOF NUCLEAR WEAPONS,LIKE ALL CONTINGENCY PLANS,WOULDBE SUBJECT TO A POLITICAL DECISION BY GOVTS AT THE TIME AND IF COUNCIL AGREED TO PULLOUTONEPLAN OF THIS CAiA~OQIJE,INDIVIDUAL OBJECTIONS COULD BE RAISEDTO ALLTHE OTHERSoFROM PRIVATECONVERSATIONS WITHA NUMBEROF MYCOLLEAGUES,l BELIEVE TH.ISv,I[W TO BE STRONGLYHELDBY SOMEDELS,NOTABLYFRENCH.ITIS TOOEARLYTO SAYWHAT WILL EMERGE FROMTHE DISCUSSION, BUTVE MAY HAVEA TOUGH FIGHT. 3o THE OTHER I"PORTANT POINT DEALT, VlTK OCT1~ WASTHEONERAISEDIN PARA•OF YOURREFTEL.HERIAGAIN,THERE IS A DEEPDIV OF OPINIONa AT ONEEXTREME IS BOYESEN,NORWEGIAN PERMREP,WHOSE PERSONAL VIEWIS THATWHOLE IDEAOF APPROVALIS MISCONCEIVED.HE LOOKSONCONTINGENCY •oo2 000741 �.: ...-: PAGE TWO 2360 PlANNING AS A CONTINUOUSPROCESS, IN WHICH IDEAS WILL 8£ SUBJECT TO CONSTANT REVIEWoHE FEARSTHAT APPROVAL OF PLANSIN SON£FOMIALSENSE WILL TEND TO FREEZE FLANNINGoTHIS HE THINKS WOUJ..D BE DANGEROUSBE• CAUSE THE WHOLESERIES OF PLANS IS BUILT UP ON A SERIES Of ASSUMPTIONS ABOUTSOVIET REACTIONS WHICH COULDWILL BE FALSIFIED BY EVENTS,, AT THE SAME TIME,HE EMPHASIZES THAT NORWEGIANAUTHORITIES ARI FIRtlLY CONVINCEDOF THE NEEi) FOR CONTINGENCYPLANNING,SO LONG AS IT DOES NOT RPT NOTLEADTO CLOS£DMINDSANDOVER-FORMAL RESULTS. 4. NO RPT NO OTHER PERMREP GOES THIS FAR.EVEN DANE,WHOGENERALLY SUPPORTS NORWEGIAN,ANNOUNCED THATHIS AUTHORITIES APPROVED PLANS QUOTE IN PRINCIPLE UNQOOTEolTALIANUS£D A SIMILARFOJIHLAoTHIS WAS DESPITE CLEARINDICATIONS THATBOTHITALIANANDDANFSHAUTHORITIES HAVESERIOUSRESERVATIONS ABOUTTH£ PLANSANO.THER!:FORE LNDERSTAND APPROVAL IN PRIN CI PLE IN A BROAD AND LOOSE SENSE.DANES OBJECT TO APPROVAL BY GOVTSOF PLANSWHICH INCLUDE ACTS CONTRARY TO INTER• NATIONAL LAW.( AS LEGAL ADVISOR SUGGESTS IN P0/62/637 SOME OF THE MARCON PLANSWOULD BE>.ITALIANSHAVESERIOUS DIFFICULTIESABOUT ALERTS, A.~D LIKE US ARE ST ILL WORRIEDOVER THE QUESTION OF TRANSFER OF CONTROL FROM TRIPARTITE TO NATO COMMANDo 5o DI SCUSSION OF TH IS POINT WILL HAVE TO BE PURSUED TOO.SOME DEl..S HAVENOTRPT NOTRECEIVEDINSTRUCTICNS YEToATTHE MOl'tINT,HOWEVER9 IT SEEMS THAT AT LEAST SEVEN Dr.LS-THE FOUR PLUS BELGILM,ITAlY AND to ,. DENMARK-WOULD PROBABLYBE PREPARED TO SUBSCRIBE SOME FOR4 ULA APPROVINGTHE PLANS IN PRINCIPLEFOR PLANNING PURPOSES AS A CATALOGUE, THE EXECUTION OF ANY ONE PLAN110R ANY COMB INATION, TO BE SUBJECTTO A SPECIFIC POLITICALDECISIONBY GOVTSAT THE TIME.] BOYESEN$ VIEW IS PERSONAL;HE IS NOT RPT NOT CERTAIN HIS GOVT WOULD SHARE IT4MY OWN VIEW IS THAT,WHILE A N'UMBtR Of HIS COMMENTSARE WELL TAKEN!)IT IS REALLY GOING TOO FAR TO EXPECT THAT TKE COUNCIL,HAVING DIRECTED A YEAR AGO THAT PLANS BE PREPAREO,WOULDNOT RPT NOT REACT IN SOMEFORMULA OR ANOTHER TO THE PLANSNOWTHEYHAVEBEENPRESENTEDo ••• 3 000742 �-PAGETkREE 2360 6.THIS DEALSWITH PARASl,2 AND4 OF YOURINSfRUCTIONS;?ARA3RAISES DIFFERENTPROBLEMS.YOU MENTIONALERTS.I WILL BE REPORTINGON THIS A~PECT~EPAkATELY.YOUR SECONDPOINT WASABOUTOURQUESTIONON THE THANSfEROF CONTROL.ON THIS,I UNDERSTAND FROMPRIVATETALKSTHAT TRIPAHTITEPLANNERS ARE RELUCTANT TO BUDGEF~OMANSWER THEYGAVE US EAKLIEReHOWEVER,NO RPT NO ANSWER TO OURSECONDPRESSINGOF THIS POINT HAS liEEN RETURNED.CHAIRMAN RECOGNIZED AT OCTlO MTGTHATA NUMBER OF DELS COULDNOT RPT NOT BE EXPECTED TO MOVEFORWARD UNTIL STANDINGGROUPHADREPLIED TO QUESTIONSDELS HADASKED.HEPRESSED STANDINGGROUPREP STRONGLY TO GET THE ANSWERS QUICKLY.ATTHE MOMENT, THE BALL IS IN THE Pl.ANNE RS COURTON THIS POINTo 7.FINALLY,YOURPARA3MENTIONSECONOMIC COUNTERMEASURES.IN A FORMALSENSE,THIS QUESTIONIS SEPARATEFROMAPPROVAL OF BERCOM/MARCON PLANS.THETHREEHAVENOWMADECLEARTHATECONOMIC COUNTERMEASURES WOULD BELONGLARGELYTO PHASEII OF A CRISIS.ALL THE BERCOM/MARCON PLANSBELONGTO PHASEIII.THUS IT WOULD BE THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE TO APPROVETHEMWITHOUT NECESSARILYACCEPTINGFURTHERDECISIONS ON ECONOMIC COUNTERMEASURES.HOWEVER THE TWOFORMSOF RESPONSEARE LIN~ED IN POSSIBLE PROGRESSION OF MEASURES.IFWETAKETHE INITIATIVE TO RAISE THIS QUESTION,THERESULTWILL BE IMMEDIATE PRESSUREON CDA, SINCE COAHAS THE MOSTRESERVEDPOSITION ON THE WHOLE QUESTIONOF ECONOMIC COUNTERMEASURES.EVEN IF WEDO NOT RPT NOT RAISE THE QUESTION OURSELVES,ITCANNOT RPT NOT BE AVOIDEDMUCHLONGER;YOU WILL NOTICEPARA17OF P0/62/641 SAYS THE SUBJECTWILL BE PLACEDON THE AGENDA AT AN EARLYDATE IGNATIEFf0 ~' 9 ' 000743 � 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/. Title A name given to the resource NATO 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/. Title A name given to the resource Berlin Crisis / 11 OCTOBER 1962 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1962-10-11 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context CDTT00044 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived NATO Paris to External Affairs, "Berlin Contingency Planning,’’ 11 Oct. 1962, LAC, RG 25, vol. 6080, file no. 50341-A-2-40, part 2. BERCON plans Berlin contingency Denmark econmic countermeasures tripartite