USUN Files

Memorandum by Mr. Charles P. Noyes, Adviser to the Permanent United States Delegation to the United Nations


The following statements were made to Representatives of the Security Council to the effect that the United States had no intention of [Page 368] pressing for a vote by the Security Council on sections of the Atomic Energy Report as to which there remained disagreement with the Russians.

1. Ambassador Gromyko

Mr. Johnson made the following statements to Mr. Gromyko over the telephone:

“Mr. Gromyko, there is one aspect of this that I do want to emphasize to you most sincerely, and that is that the United States wants to reach agreement on this atomic energy problem and we have no intention of trying to push consideration of this report immediately to disagreement, to the point of disagreement [sic]”

“Now, we hope between tomorrow (Jan. 15) and February 4, which is nearly three weeks, it is nearly three weeks, to discuss with you and with the other members of the Council and of the Atomic Energy Commission the parts on which we can reach agreement—we want to develop the agreement as far as possible on the recommendations—and then to refer back to the Commission the agreed recommendations for the drafting of treaty provisions, and so forth, and then reference back to the Commission of those recommendations as to which agreement is not reached in the Security Council for further consideration and possible resolution of differences in the drafting process.”

“Many people in the Council thought that by our first resolution we were trying to push consideration of this atomic energy report to the point even of disagreement, trying to push the thing through, and that is not true.”

To the latter statement, Mr. Gromyko replied:

“I appreciate it very much and I am glad to hear this. I think this may be helpful…”

Later on, Mr. Gromyko added:

“Well, I appreciate your observation that you did not wish to push this matter to the point of disagreement. That is very sound…”

2. Ambassador Parodi

In a telephone conversation, Mr. Johnson made a statement along the following lines to Mr. Parodi:

We would try to have everyone in agreement and to gain a common mind before the consideration of the AEC Report. “We can exchange views because we haven’t the desire to push this report to a negative vote. We do not want to take a rigid position that the report should be pushed to a negative vote.”

3. Sir Alexander Cadogan

In a telephone conversation with Sir Alexander, Mr. Johnson stated that he “had tried to impress on both Gromyko and Parodi that the U.S. does not want to press the action on this report (AEC Report) to disagreement. We don’t want to do that.”

[Page 369]

He also stated that by having the delay which the U.S. proposed we would have time to reflect on this Report (AEC Report), to have consultations with the other members and perhaps narrow down the areas of disagreement to the point where we can have prompt determination in the Council and send the Report back to the AEC.

Charles P. Noyes