https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/ef3d04509c551d3b1ee011bde5965827.pdf 5b815b4e190f482f611077989f99049c PDF Text Text Document disclosed under the Access to Information Aa Doc u m e nt d iv n Ig u e e n u e rt u d e I a Loi su r faeces a I'informatio S) y COPY C.L. OF 2 5 i: MOPARIS N0V8/57 TOPSEC TO EXTERNAL 1 9 2 0 INFO LDN WASHDC &Q/OJ' OUR TEL 1916 N0V8 & f e > DEC MINISTERIAL MEETING % AS I SHALL BE IN OTT NEXT WEEK AND ALSO AS WE HAVE RELATIVELY LITTLE CONCRETE INFO ON SUBJECT,I SHALL ATTEMPT AT THIS TIME ONLY A VER/ TENTATIVE INDICATION OF MAIN AREAS IN WHICH IT MAY BE POSSIBLE FOR DEC MINISTERIAL COUNCIL TO TAKE MAJOR DECISIONS.I HAVE READ WITH INTEREST MR ROBERTSON'S ACCOUNT OF USA THINKINGCHIS TEL 2 3 5 2 N0V6)WHICH I S MORE SPECIFIC THAN THE INFO WE HAVE HAD FROM USA DELEGATION HERE. 2. 8, .8)85-46 1 8 3 ) $ , A S I HAVE EXPLAINED IN MY REF TEL,WE MAY NOW KNOW IN ADVANCE OF DEC COUNCIL HOW FAR IT WILL HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE FOR USA GOVT AND STILL MORE UK GOVT TO PREPARE THEMSELVES FOR MAJOR DECISIONS .HOWEVER,FOLLOWING IDEAS COULD COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL: (A)AS YOU SAY IN YOUR TEL V697 N0V7,STOCKPILING OF TACTICAL ATOMIC WARHEADS IN EUROPE UNDER NATO CONTROL I S LIKELY TO BE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISIONS OF DEC COUNCIL.IT I S REGARDED BY FRENCH AND OTHER EUROPEANS AS OF THE GREATEST SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE ALLIANCE. IN YOUR CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES MENTIONED IN WR ROBERTSON'S MSG (STOCKPILING WEAPONS WITH SACEUR OR CONCLUDING NATIONAL BILATERAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN USA AND OTHER NATO COUNTRIES)I THINK WE MUST BEAR IN MIND THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WEAPONS AND WARHEADS,AS WELL AS THE BROAD RANGE OF TACTICAL WEAPONS AT PRESENT AVAILABLE TO USA GOVT.I WOULD DOUBT THAT THERE I S MUCH PROSPECT OF USA GOVT AND CONGRESS AGREEING TO GIVE NUCLEAR WARHEADS TO OTHER NATO GOVTS.THESE WILL,I THINK,BE KEPT IN CUSTODY OF USA NATO PERSONEL UNDER SACEUR.THE WEAPONS LESS WARHEADS,HOWEVER,COULD WELL BE GIVEN TO NATO COMMANDERS OF OTHER NATIONALITIES NOW AND TROOPS TRAINED IN EXERCISES SO THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO USE THE WEAPONS IMMEDIATELY IF IT WERE SO DECIDED TO MEET AGGRESSION.PSYCHOLOGICALLY THE IMPORTANT THING TO MY MIND I S TO MAKE MORE REAL FOR PUBLIC OPINION THE DETERRENT VALUE OF NATO HAVING SUCH WEAPONS.THE DEC MEETING MUST MAKE IT CLEAR BEYOND ANY DOUBT THAT USA DO NOT INTEND TO BE BROWBEATEN BY SOVIET INTERCONTINENTAL MISSILES INTO ANY EROSION OF THEIR NATO COMMITMENTS. a . .2 000443 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur faeces a I'information PAGE TWO 1 9 2 0 *f PEACE WILL SURELY BE IN GREATER JEOPARDY IF USA COMMITMENT WAS .SS FIRM THAN IT IN FACT REMAINS} < B ) I F ATOMIC WARHEADS ARE TO BE STOCKPILED UNDER NATO CONTROL EUROPE,THE QUESTION MAY ARISE AS TO WHETHER ANY MODIFICATION I S NEEDED IN POLITICAL DIRECTIVE WHICH IS SACEUR'S PRESENT GUIDANCE. SOME GOVTS MAY POSSIBLY WISH TO MAKE POLITICAL DIRECTIVE MORE EXPLICIT AS TO WHICH GOVTS SHOULD SHARE IN DECISION TO USE OR NOT TO USE ATOMIC WEAPONS.MY FEELING I S THAT I T WOULD BE BETTER TO LEAVE THIS ISSUE ALONE.IN FINAL ANALYSIS I T WILL BE FOR PRESIDENT OF USA TO DECIDE IN CONSULTATION WITH SUCH HEADS OF GOVTS AS HE I S ABLE TO REACH IN THE TIME HE THINKS HE HAS FOR MAKING UP HIS MINDfANY MORE FORMAL AGREEMENT TO SHARE IN THE RESPONSIBILITY WOULD PROBABLY BE WORTHLESS.FROM A NATO POINT OF VIEW,MAIN IMPROVEMENT WOULD BE TO PLACE ATOMIC WARHEADS IN HANDS OF NATO RATHER THAN PURELY USA COMMANDERS WHILE MAINTAINING THE FACT THAT THERE V VERNMENTAL CON- TROL OVER THE GENERALS IN REGARD TO THEIR USE(OSTRATEGIC CONCEPT.I WOULD HOPE THAT ONE RESULT OF DEC MEETING WOULD BE TO FINISH PROLONGED DOCTRINAL ARGUMENT WHICH HAS DIVIDED THE ALLIANCE SINCE UK GOVT PROPOUNDED THEIR TRIPWIRE THEORY ON THE EASIS OF WHICH THEY PROPOSE TO REDUCE THEIR FORCES IN GERMANY AND REVISE THEIR OWN DEFENCE POSTURE.IT IS NOW CLEAR THAT NATO CONCEPT OF I STRONG SHIELD AND A FORWARD STRATEGY IN EUROPE I S REQUIRED IF ALLIANCE IS TO MEAN ANYTHING TO ITS EUROPEAN MEMBERS AND PARTICULARLY THE GERMANS,WHO WILL CERTAINLY BE UNDER STRONG PRESSURE IN DEC TO MAKE AMENDS FOR PAST DELAYS IN THE BUILDUP TRAINING AND EQUIPPING OF THEIR OWN FORCES WHICH AT PRESENT ARE NOT ONLY SMALL BUT BY NO MEANS EFFICIENT. I THINK IT WOULD BE A MAJOR ACHIEVEMENT IF DEC COUNCIL COULD REAFFIRM UNANIMOUSLY THE NEED FOR A STRONG SHIELD IN EUROPE,ALTHOUGH ON ACCOUNT OF UK RELUCTANCE TO DISCUSS STRATEGY UNTIL MC70 I S FINALISED SUCH A REAFFIRMATION MAY HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL MINISTERIAL MEETING TENTATIVELY SUGGESTED FOR FEB. CD)WE HAVE ALSO HEARD THAT MORE WEIGHT MAY NOW BE GIVEN IN USA THINKING TO CONCEPT OF BALANCED FORCES WITH MORE SPECIFICALLY ASSIGNED AGREED ROLES FOR NATIONAL FORCES ASSIGNED TO THE ALLIANCE.THIS WOULD MEAN GREATER SPECIALIZATION.WE KNOW THAT ONE ASPECT OF THIS PROBLEM • . .3 000444 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de ta Loi sur faeces a {'information \ DES :.RSUADE OTHER NA' IES TO ASSUME A LARGER SHARE t>F "EFENCE BURDEN IN RELATIVELY CONVENTIONAL FIELDS,SINCE USA MU NOW DEVOTE A LARGER PROPORTION OF ITS RESOURCES TO RESEARCH,DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION OF NEW WEAPONS.AT SAME TIME THERE IS PROBABLY A PREDILECTION ON PART OF OTHER NATO COUNTRIES TO HAVE MORE,RATHER THAN LESS,MUTUAL AID FROM USA IN WEAPONS FIELD.THIS WILL ONLY BE POSSIBLE IF AGREEMENT CAN BE REACHED ON SPECIALIZATION.THE SAME DOCTRINE COULD,OF COURSE,BE CARRIED INTO OTHER FIELDS INCLUDING SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND PERHAPS PRODUCTION OF NEW WEAPONS,ALTHOUGH THIS IS MORE COMPLICATED. (E)ANOTHER PROBLEM OF MAJOR IMPORTANCE WHICH MAY BE COMING TO A HEAD BY DEC IS QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE ALLIANCE ENVISAGES THE POSSIBILITY OF FIGHTING A LIMITED WAR.MR DULLES,IF WE ARE TO JUDGE FROM HIS OCT FOREIGN AFFAIRS ARTICLE AND OTHER PRONOUNCEMENTS, HAS ABSORBED A GOOD DEAL OF THE KISSINGER DOCTRINE THAT WESTERN POLICY SHOULD HAVE MORE THAN THE ULTIMATE ALTERNATIVE TO YIELDING TO SOVIET PRESSURE OR BLACKMAIL.IN FACT,SACEUR HAS INCLUDED AMONG HIS RECOMMENDATIONS THE CONCEPT THAT IT MIGHT BE NECESSARY FOR NATO TO BE PREPARED TO FIGHT A LIMITED EUROPEAN WAR USING TACTICAL ATONH WEAPONS BUT WITHOUT USE OF ULTIMATE DETERMENT AT LEAST AT THE OUTSET.ACCORDING TO ADMIRAL DENNY,UK REP ON STANDING GROUP,ITS MEMBERS ARE AT PRESENT OPPOSED TO THIS CONCEPT.IT I S OF COURSE QUESTIONABLE WHETHER THIS DEBATE WILL COME INTO THE OPEN AS EARLY AS THE DEC MEETING .VERY FEW GOVTS ARE AWARE OF THE DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN SACEUR AND STANDING GROUP ON THIS QUESTIONjON THE OTHER HAND,IF STRATEGIC ISSUES ARE DEBATED;W£ MIGHT FIND USA PROPOSING DULLES AND NORSTAD THESIS,WHILE UK MIGHT HAVE TO QUESTION IT.MOREOVER,AS SACEUR HIMSELF HAS POINTED OUT IN HIS LATEST STUDY,IT WOULD IN ANY CASE BE VERY DIFFICULT TO PREVENT A LIMITED WAR IN EUROPE FROM BECOMING GENERAL. 3.SOME GOVTS MAY FEEL THAT ISSUES OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE EXAMINED BEFORE DECISIONS ON STOCKPILING ATOMIC WEAPONS OR ON NEW WEAPONS GENERALLY ARE TAKENjON THE OTHER HAND,FINAL DECISIONS WILL IN ANY EVENT HAVE TO AWAIT THE PRESENTATION OF MC70.IT WOULD SEEM NECESSARY TO THINK OUT CLEARLY IN ADVANCE HOW FAR WE CAN MOVE IN DEC ON BASIS OF ...4 000445 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la JLOJ sur faeces a I'information PAGE FOUR 1 9 2 0 INCOMPLETE MILITARY JUDGMENT ON i AIN PROBLEMS AND DEPENDING ALS N WHETHER MAJOR GOVTS CONCERNED CAN BE READY FOR THE BIG DECISIO A,WITH REGARD TO NEW WEAPONS GENERALLY,I UNDERSTAND THAT USA ARE CONSIDERING THREE CLASSIFICATIONS?(A)WEAPONS WHICH WILL BE MADE AND USED ONLY BY USAJ<B)WEAPONS WHICH WILL BE MADE IN USA BUT CAN BE DISTRIBUTED UNDER TIGHT SECURITY CONTROL TO NATO ALLIESj(C)WEAPONS WHICH,UNDER SECURITY CONTROL ,CAN BE NOT ONLY USED BUT PRODUCED IN OTHER NATO COUNTRIES.(THE WEAPONS IN THIS LAST CATEGORY WILL BE THOSE IN WHICH RUSSIANS ARE KNOWN TO HAVE AT LEAST THE EQUIVALENT*) 5.DECISI0NS MIGHT THEREFORE BE TAKEN IN DEC RE DISTRIBUTION OF WEAPONS IN CATEGORYCB)ABOVE AND PRELIMINARY DECISIONS RE DISTRIBUTION OF PRODUCTION OF WEAPONS IN CATEGORY<C)ABOVE.HERE IT SEEMS LIKELY THAT CONCEPT OF BALANCED FORCES CAN BE EXTENDED INTO THE PRODUCTION FIELD. <IN THIS CONNECTION GERMAN DELEGATION HAVE BEEN ASKING SECRETARIA" TODAY FOR CONFIRMATION OF PRESS STORIES FROM LDN TO EFFECT THAT GERMANY WOULD BE ASKED TO MANUFACT SOME CATEGORIES OF MISSILES AND OTHER NEW WEAPONS WITH CONSEQUENTIAL REVISIONS TO BE MADE IN THE PARIS AGREEMENTSoSECRETARIAT REPLIED THAT THEY KNEW NOTHING AND SUSPECTED MR SPAAK KNEW NOTHING OF ANY SUCH PROPOSAL.) 6.WHAT SEEMS TO BE NEEDED FOR NATO COUNTRIES AS A GROUP TO MAINTAIN OR RE-ESTABLISH THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL LEAD OVER RUSSIANS I S A GREATER CO-ORDINATED EFFORT IN FIELD OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.IT I S NOT AT THE MOMENT PRIMARILY A QUESTION OF PRODUCTION RESOURCES BUT OF DIVIDING UP MORE RATIONALLY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN MEMBER COUNTRIES AND OF MAKING RESULTS KNOWN MORE FREELY AND BROADLY WITHIN THE ALLIANCE TO AVOID UNNECESSARY DUPLICATION AND TO ENSURE AS ECONOA AS POSSIBLE PRODUCTION.THIS SEEMS TO BE THE ASSUMPTION BEHIND T; PRIORITY EVERYWHERE BEING GIVEN TO PROMOTING MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE COOPERATION WITHIN THE ALLIANCE IN SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL FIELD.-,. CLEARLY NATO DECISIONS WILL HAVE TO APPLY IN PRINCIPLE TO ALL NATO MEMBERS,EVEN THOUGH SOME ARE IN FACT BETTER EQUIPPED THAN OTHERS IN THEIR ABILITY TO COOPERATE IN THE KEY RESEARCH ENDEAVOURS IN THE NUCLEAR AND MISSILE F I E L D S . I F SUCH COOPERATION I S TO BE BROADENED BEYOND ANGLO-SAXON COUNTRIES,IT WILL CLEARLY HAVE TO INCLUDE GERMANY AND FRANCE,AND PERHAPS ITALY,AS THE MOST ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS.FROM • •. 5 ] 000446 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de ta loi sur faeces a {'information v. PAGE FIVE 1920 COORDINATED RESEARCH THERE I S HOPE FOR MORE EFFECTIVE STANDARDIZATION AND SPECIALIZATION IN PRODUCTION THAN SECURITY AND COMMERCIAL INTERESTS HAVE PERMITTED IN THE PAST. 7.WE ARE SUMMARIZING,IN A SEPARATE MSG,A NUMBER OF SPECIFIC IDEAS WHICH HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED JOINTLY IN PARIS DURING THE PAST WEEK BY KOEPFLI,HEAD OF NATO TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC TASK FORCE AND NOLTING, DEPUTY USA REP.MR SPAAK IS,WE UNDERSTAND,PREPARED TO PUT THESE IDEAS FORWARD AT DEC MINISTERIAL MEETING IF HE I S FIRST ASSURED OF THE BACKING OF USA AND UK. S.ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO BRINGING PRESENT CLICHES TOWARDS STUBBORN FACTS I S THE JACKSON REPORT,WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED BY NATO PARLIAMENTARIANS HERE NEXT WEEK.WE UNDERSTAND FROM TEL 2 3 5 3 N0V6 FROM WASHDC THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY SENT YOU COPIES OF THIS REPORT WILGRESS 000447 � 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 CDNW02253 Title A name given to the resource NATOParis to External 1920 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 08-Nov-57 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived �NATO - Stockpiling of atomic weapons in NATO countries,� RG25-A-3-b, vol. 5958, 50219-AL-1-40, pt. 1.1, Library and Archives Canada (LAC). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Department of External Affairs Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Canadian Crown Subject The topic of the resource atomic cooperation, NATO, nuclear weapons, Europe Description An account of the resource Dec Ministerial Meeting 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