Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, National Security Affairs, Foreign Economic Policy, Volume I

Department of State Atomic Energy Files

Notes on the First Meeting of the Sponsoring Powers, Lake Success, New York, August 9, 1949, 11:30 a. m.¹

New York, August 9, 1949, 11:30 a.m.

secret

Representatives:

• McNaughton—Canada
• Tsiang²—China
• Chauvel³—France
• Hickerson—United States
• Cadogan—United Kingdom
• Tsarapkin⁴—USSR

The meeting was opened by ASyG Price,⁵ who offered the services and cooperation of the UN Secretariat, then suggested that the representatives might select a Chairman. Tsiang (China) suggested a Chairman for each meeting to rotate in English alphabetical order. This was agreed as amended by Cadogan to retain the same representative as Chairman for an entire day should more than one meeting take place in any one day.

McNaughton (Canada) took the chair and suggested that the agenda be the GA Resolution of November 4, 1948; in particular, paragraph three thereof. Tsarapkin (USSR) objected, pointing out that there were other paragraphs in the Resolution; in particular, paragraph one (which approved the Commission plan). If that were the case, the USSR felt constrained to put forward its proposals of February 25, 1949,⁶ June 11, 1947⁷ and June 19, 1946⁸ as items in the agenda.

McNaughton, Chairman, assured the Soviet representative that the focus was on paragraph three, that our purpose was to meet and consult and try to find a basis for agreement. There was no intention of preventing any representative from putting forward any proposals for this purpose.

Hickerson, U.S., agreed with this interpretation. Tsarapkin, USSR, stated that if paragraph three is the agenda and any representative would be permitted to put forth its ideas—such as those already suggested by the Soviet representative—then he would not insist upon the formal inclusion of the Soviet proposals “now”. McNaughton, Chairman, stated that this interpretation is now clear and that the main central feature of the agenda is paragraph three of the GA Resolution.

After some discussion on simultaneous and consecutive interpretation, particularly the request made by Tsarapkin for interpretation into Russian, it was agreed, and ASyG Price accepted on behalf of the Secretariat that when French or English was spoken, an interpreter would simultaneously give a Russian translation via earphones. This was agreed to as was a Chinese proposal that other representatives be granted a similar courtesy upon request.

There was no objection to the Chairman’s next suggestion that summary records should be prepared by the Secretariat.

When the Chairman suggested that the meetings be closed, Tsarapkin (USSR) demurred, but acceded to the wishes of the other representatives to keep the meetings closed for the time being and permit a re-opening of this question in the future if it should become desirable.

McNaughton, Chairman, suggested that there be an agreed press communique issued by the Secretariat after each meeting and that each representative undertake not to make any comment beyond this agreed communique. There was no objection to this proposal.

Hickerson (U.S.) next spoke, stating that we are here at the request of the General Assembly to meet and consult in order to determine whether a basis for agreement on international control of atomic energy and on the prohibition of atomic weapons can be reached. Or stated in another way, we are here to see whether the deadlock can be broken by trying a fresh approach. One point, however, must be emphasized; namely, that the U.S. supports the Commission plan of control and prohibition approved by the General Assembly, because it is the only scheme that we know or have been able to find that is effective. However, we recognize that human ingenuity is great and perhaps variations or new proposals can also provide the safeguards and the security the world demands. The proposals of the Soviet Union to date are not acceptable as they fall far short of providing these safeguards. The U.S., however, will give sympathetic consideration to any proposals by the Soviet Union or by others that can bring about effective control and prohibition.

Cadogan (U.K.) agreed with the U.S. statement and suggested that we might approach the problem in some new way in an attempt to avoid a repetition of the three years of argument. These three years have resulted in the Commission plan, which the U.K. supports, and certain other proposals and plans. Cadogan suggested that perhaps a fruitful way of proceeding would be to outline the fundamental points of the plans, that these might be prepared in a day or so, distributed to the various representatives, and be a basis for discussion at our next meeting.

McNaughton, Chairman, thanked the U.K. for this suggestion and suggested that this be done so that it could be used at the next meeting. Cadogan agreed to do it.

It was agreed that the next meeting be convened for Tuesday, August 16, at 10:30 a. m. at which time China would be in the Chair, and there was no objection to the Chairman’s suggestion that the U.K. list be the item for discussion.

A purely factual communique prepared by the Secretariat was slightly amended and agreed to. The meeting adjourned at 1:05 p. m.

(The various points on procedure, as well as the U.K. suggestion for a preparation of the list of fundamental points had been agreed to at a meeting of the five friendly representatives, held just prior to the official meeting, at Sir Terence Shone’s home in Lake Success.)

(After the meeting Hickerson approached Tsarapkin, who stated that he did not understand Hickerson’s statement regarding new proposals as the USSR “had no new proposals”.)

1. This account was prepared within the United States Delegation for the use of American personnel. The agreed summary records of the first ten meetings of the six permanent members of the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission (the sponsors of General Assembly Resolution 1(I), January 24, 1946, establishing the UNAEC), August 9–October 13, 1949, are printed in GA(IV), Suppl. No. 15, pp. 3–32.
2. Dr. Tingfu F. Tsiang, Permanent Chinese Representative at the United Nations; Representative to the Atomic Energy Commission.
3. Jean Chauvel, Permanent French Representative at the United Nations; Representative to the Atomic Energy Commission.
4. Semyon K. Tsarapkin, Alternate Soviet Representative to the Atomic Energy Commission.
5. Byron Price, Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations.
6. For partial text, see footnote 6, p. 37.
7. The proposals are contained in an address by Soviet Representative Andrey Andreyevich Gromyko at the 12th Meeting of the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission, June 11, 1947, AEC, 2nd yr., No. 2, pp. 20–24.
8. The proposals are contained in an address by Gromyko at the 2nd Meeting of the UNAEC, June 19, 1946, AEC, 1st yr., No. 2, pp. 23–30.