Department of State Atomic Energy Files

Memorandum by the Deputy Director of the Office of Special Political Affairs (Ross) to the Secretary of State

confidential

Senator Austin telephoned me yesterday afternoon and Herschel Johnson last night to report on their conversations Thursday and Friday with the other members of the Security Council on our draft disarmament resolution1 (copy attached for convenient reference). The highlights of their report follow. I will send you somewhat more detailed memoranda of my conversations with them as soon as they are typed.2

1.
They have talked with all of the other ten members of the Council.
2.
Our draft resolution was very well received by all but Gromyko.
3.
Gromyko did not see the necessity for our resolution but did not seem to have any very positive objection to it. It was clear in Senator Austin’s conversation with him that Gromyko realized that the terms of reference of the Atomic Energy Commission would have to be excluded from the terms of reference of the new Commission. It was also clear that Gromyko would not object to the Security Council proceeding to consideration of the Atomic Energy Commission’s Report as soon as action was taken looking toward establishment of the proposed new Commission on other phases of disarmament.
4.
The Polish representative, who ordinarily might be expected to follow the Russian line, told Mr. Johnson he thought our resolution was a very conciliatory gesture; he said he would try to see Gromyko, apparently with the intention to try to win him over.
5.
Gromyko particularly, and apparently a number of other members of the Council, felt that it was unnecessary to provide, as we do in paragraph 2 of our resolution, for the Committee to report “regarding the composition of the proposed Commission”. The others seem to feel (Senator Austin agrees with this and so do I) that the proposed Commission would have to be composed of all of the members of the Security Council.

Recommendation—I expect to be talking on the telephone with Senator Austin some time this morning. I should like authorization from you to tell him (a) that the Department has no objection to his dropping out the reference to “composition”, if he considers this necessary, so that the phrase would read “regarding the terms of reference of the proposed Commission”; and (b) that we feel it would be wisest for us to stick to the contemplated procedure, namely, that he should [Page 393] go ahead and introduce this resolution on Tuesday3 in substantially its present form.4

  1. Ante, p. 388.
  2. Neither printed.
  3. February 4.
  4. In a marginal notation, Acheson indicated his agreement with the recommendation.