501.BC Atomic/6–2646: Telegram
The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Smith) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 26—10:20 a.m.]
2013. Viewed from this Embassy, Gromyko’s atomic control proposal is thoroughly disingenuous proposition which tends to (1) seize for USSR moral leadership on atomic question and (2) obscure the basic issue, which is inspection. I do not think USSR should be permitted to grasp the initiative on so critical an issue. I question whether attempt at logical refutation of Gromyko proposal will suffice. I suggest consideration of our boldly recapturing moral ascendancy and reemphasizing basic issue of inspection by stating that we are prepared to discuss regulation and control of all weapons of war—not only atomic bomb—provided such discussions should lead to creation of effective international machinery under UNO for unhampered inspection of military establishments and means of production provided we can make such a proposal in all sincerity.17 If USSR accepts, well and good—we shall have attained the millenium. If USSR equivocates or refuses, then Soviet pretensions will have been exposed for what they are worth. The one vital factor which we are [Page 767] unable to evaluate here is the effect of such a proposal on US public opinion in its relation to our own plans for defense and security.
Department please repeat to Paris for Secretary as Moscow’s 220.
- In a memorandum dated June 27, 1946, Llewellyn E. Thompson, Chief of the Division of Eastern European Affairs, stated: “Ambassador Smith’s view as reported in his telegram 2013, June 27, that basic issue in the atomic control question is that of inspection is certainly correct. If his proposal that we state we are prepared to discuss regulation and control of all weapons of war would in fact recapture moral ascendency for us and re-emphasize the basic issue of inspection, then it might be worth trying. I feel obliged to point out, however, that such a move might have the opposite effect and obscure the issue.” (501.BC–Atomic/6–2746)↩