Department of State Atomic Energy Files
Memorandum of Conversation, by Messrs. Frederick H. Osborn and R. Gordon Arneson
Subject: Position of the United States in the UNAEC
| Participants: | The Secretary |
| Mr. Frederick Osborn | |
| Mr. Arneson | |
| Mr. Rusk (for latter part of conversation) |
Mr. Osborn presented in detail General McNaughton’s position and that of certain other delegates to the UNAEC with respect to the time at which the AEC should come to a vote on its Fourth Report or a resolution to substitute for a report.
Mr. Osborn stated that General McNaughton was in general agreement with the content of the draft resolution proposed by the United States, feeling that it states the facts with regard to the impasse in the AEC and the reasons for the impasse. General McNaughton further feels that at some time the AEC has a clear responsibility to state clearly its position. However, General McNaughton feels that to vote such a resolution at this time before the meeting of the Sponsoring Powers would appear to take the ball away from the Sponsoring [Page 90] Powers where it has been placed by the General Assembly, would make it appear that the Commission was prejudging the case and would endanger the solidarity of the majority because of the possibility that such a resolution at this time would not get the affirmative votes of the entire majority which hitherto had supported the position of the AEC.
Mr. Arneson indicated his feeling that action on the proposed U.S. resolution at this time did not prejudge the position of the Sponsoring Powers but, on the other hand, would make it perfectly clear that the Commission could not solve the impasse with the Soviet Union at the Commission level and therefore placed the responsibility directly in the lap of the Sponsoring Powers in accordance with the instructions of the General Assembly. Mr. Arneson pointed out that whatever difficulties there might be in gaining acceptance of such a resolution at this time would be increased if the resolution were introduced after the meeting of the Sponsoring Powers or at a time when the Sponsorng Powers have not yet come to a final conclusion. He pointed out that it was quite possible that the Sponsoring Powers could not come to a conclusion before September 15 and might have to report at a later date during the meeting of the Assembly, or might even have to report that the consultations were still continuing and could not be completed before the end of this General Assembly. Delay in acting in the AEC at this time would mean that this General Assembly would go by without any report from the AEC. He felt that it would be disastrous to go to the GA with a position which would make it possible for the members of the Assembly to be guided by their wishful thinking and hope that the AEC might come up with a solution.
Very full consideration was given to this matter and a lengthy discussion took place. The Secretary said that the United States was still firm in its desire to achieve international agreement on the prohibition of atomic weapons and the development of atomic energy for peaceful purposes on an equitable basis among all nations, but that he himself felt that it was inconceivable that such an end could be achieved on the basis of national ownership of explosive materials and national ownership of facilities for making explosive materials. The Secretary said that it was absolutely essential that the United States make its position on these matters 100 percent clear in the GA. He did not see how the AEC could escape its responsibility for restating not only the impasse, but the reasons therefor, namely the refusal of the Soviet Union to accept the cooperative plan approved by the General Assembly on November 4, 1948, and their insistence on their own plan.
The Secretary was not willing to risk the dangers which would attach to deferring this very clear responsibility of the AEC until [Page 91] September in the hope that the Sponsoring Powers will have reported by that time.
The Secretary therefore gave his opinion that the U.S. Delegation should call a meeting of the Commission at the earliest possible moment; and propose a resolution along the lines indicated, either as an amendment of the Cuban-Argentine resolution1 or otherwise, and should bring such a resolution to a vote. Whether or not such a resolution obtains the full majority of the Commission or even if it fails to obtain the majority of the Commission, the position of the U.S. will have been made clear and can be repeated firmly in the General Assembly. The Secretary recognizes the grave responsibility attached to this line of action, and hopes very much that the delegates of other nations will realize why the United States feels it can not properly lay itself open any longer to the continuation of the absurd and dangerous propaganda being carried out by the Soviet Union in the UNAEC. Further, it is felt that the Soviet Union will never believe that the majority mean business on the terms laid down in the recommendations approved by the General Assembly on November 4 unless the majority of all nations concerned continue to take a perfectly clear and definite position. That appears to be the only procedure that carries hope of bringing the Soviet Union to realize the necessity for reconsidering their position.
On the basis of certain personal reasons which Mr. Osborn advanced, the Secretary agreed that while he would very much prefer that Mr. Osborn represent the United States in the consultations, he could not insist on it. It was agreed that in view of Mr. Osborn’s projected absence from New York during the latter half of August that:
- 1.
- Mr. Osborn would sit for the United States in the consultations until the 15th of August in the event consultations began before that time.
- 2.
- Jack Hickerson would take over from Mr. Osborn on the 15th. In order to do so, Mr. Hickerson would have to come back from his vacation on or shortly after the first of August in order that he might become thoroughly acquainted with the issues before taking over.
- 3.
- Mr. Arneson would be available as much as other commitments permitted to assist both Mr. Osborn and Mr. Hickerson.
- 4.
- In the General Assembly Mr. Jessup would be designated as the member of the U.S. Delegation to handle the atomic energy debate.
- 5.
- While Mr. Osborn after the 15th of August would not be the principal representative in the consultations, nor would he carry the ball in the General Assembly debates, he would be available to assist in both instances.