Department of State Atomic Energy Files

The United States Representative on the Atomic Energy Commission (Baruch) to the Secretary of State

Dear Mr. Secretary: I have delayed answering your letter of April 19th38 until I might be in receipt of a letter from the Under Secretary in keeping with our extended telephone talk on the afternoon of April 22nd. At that time it was not clear whether Mr. Acheson was planning the creating of a large and varied staff within the State Department or whether he advised us to create such a staff in order to carry on our work. I thought it would be more fruitful of the results we have in common, if Mr. Hancock were to go over the entire matter with him, which he did on April 30th, in a thoroughly satisfactory interview.

I am quite in accord with you on the first two paragraphs of your letter of April 19th. It was because I thought “the report which has come to be called the State Department Report and which was prepared under the direction of Mr. Acheson” had opened up constructive and practical avenues of approach to the general subject, that I asked you to have the Board of Consultants continued in order that they might explore further those approaches and give us the benefit of the [Page 786] intensive study which they had already given to it. I knew of no other group which could pick up the problem so well, without a material loss of time.

It was with very great regret to me that the members found that they could not continue the Committee and its sub-committee.39

Mr. Lilienthal expressed his view that a new group would require an additional eight weeks of intensive study to arrive at the same points of progress as the groups in question, and that I would have to spend an equal amount of time to post myself on the problem.

As you know, some of both groups have placed their services at my disposal and, of course, I am grateful to them. My plan is to use these men to the greatest possible extent.

The reply of the Committee of Experts brought out the fact that there were some very complex questions that must be studied, none of which is more than adverted to in the Report. It was just these problems which I thought best be met by the former groups. Now with the appointment of the Mexican delegate (completing the list) and the pressure for an early meeting, we must avoid any appearance of procrastination that might arouse suspicion on the part of the general public, and particularly of any of our associates in the United Nations. We shall endeavor to move rapidly but surely in view of the difficulties which they spoke of so graphically.

In our conversation over the telephone I was glad to clear up one point and that was—when asked my opinion you agreed that there should be a written statement by me, not for the purpose of publication but to have as a matter of record. As to what becomes of such a statement—that rests entirely with the State Department or the President.

Mr. Lilienthal, Dr. Bush and Mr. Acheson had all spoken of the necessity of a large “battery” of experts. You referred to the appointment of Mr. Fahy for legal work on this problem within the State Department. My understanding is that, as discussed at the Acheson-Hancock meeting, you are not planning to build any large group in the State Department at this time to help in developing the policy to be followed by me in my work with the Atomic Energy Commission. I plan to set up an adequate but small staff to develop the facts in order to better understand the problems.

Of course, I assume that when the Commission reports to the Council, my official work will be done and that the State Department will take over the further responsibility. I am not planning an organization with the thought of carrying my work beyond that point. I assume, [Page 787] however, that the State Department will take appropriate steps to set up such an organization as it may wish for carrying on the work beyond this point, to cope with the problems which would involve work with the heads of Government and the Assembly as well as the treaty forming work and the early discussions of the Authority, should it be set up.

Sincerely yours,

[File copy not signed]
  1. Ante, p. 777.
  2. With respect to the decisions by the Acheson Committee and its Board of Consultants to decline further service as formal bodies, see Hewlett and Anderson, pp. 559–560.