Atomic Energy files, lot 57 D 688, “IAEA Policies”
Memorandum of Conversation, by Philip J. Farley of the Office of the Consultant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy Affairs
- Subject:
- Planning for the International Atomic Energy Agency
- Participants:
- Mr. John A. Hall, AEC
- Mr. A.A. Wells, AEC
- Mr. L.C. Meeker, L/UNA
- Mr. Bechhoefer, UNP
- Mr. Meyers, UNP
- Mr. Gerard Smith, S/AE
- Mr. P.J. Farley, S/AE
At a meeting in Mr. Smith’s office at 11 a.m. on September 7, plans for organizing the International Atomic Energy Agency were discussed. The attached schedule1 was accepted as an initial basis for proceeding. Conclusions reached regarding the principal problems in proceeding with formation of the Agency are summarized herein.
Approach to the UN
The Secretary of State has decided that, in his initial speech before the UN General Assembly, he will report US plans for proceeding with formation of an International Atomic Energy Agency. The US position will be reported and discussed more fully by Ambassador Lodge in the General Assembly and perhaps in Committee One.
Drafting of the remarks by the Secretary and of guidance for Ambassador Lodge has been undertaken by UNP with assistance from S/AE.
It was hoped that the remarks by the Secretary and Ambassador Lodge will clear up some of the misapprehensions concerning US plans for the Agency, and in particular concerning the relationship of the Agency to the UN, which have been apparent since the President’s Labor Day speech.2 No earlier public announcement [Page 1513] was considered desirable to clarify points raised in the press concerning the President’s speech, but it will be publicly indicated that the US plans to report further concerning the Agency to the UN General Assembly.
International Scientific Conference
Dr. Rabi has now returned to this country from his visit to Europe to discuss plans for the proposed international scientific conference with Sir John Cockcroft and other British and Canadian representatives, and with representatives of the French atomic energy project. As soon as Dr. Rabi can come to Washington to report on his trip, decisions will be made regarding sponsorship of the conference and regarding date, location, invitations, and agenda for the conference. In view of the Secretary of State’s decision not to seek UN sponsorship for the formation of the agency, the previous plan for UN sponsorship of the conference needs to be reviewed. (UN sponsorship of the conference appears less desirable than sponsorship by the US or a group of nations.)
It was tentatively agreed that, if the UN does not sponsor the conference, an attempt would be made to reach agreement on the agenda, date, location, and invitations for the conference before October 1. S/AE and AEC will get in touch with Dr. Rabi and prepare recommendations on these points.
Composition of Working Group
It was recalled that the French Embassy has suggested that a working group consisting of the UK, Canada, France, and the US be set up to prepare plans for the formation of the Agency.
After discussion, it was concluded that, initially, consultation on plans for the Agency should be quite informal and should be limited to the US, the UK, and Canada. These three nations are associated in atomic energy matters through the Combined Policy Committee and have common interests in materials procurement and in control of classified information. There will be many problems requiring the attention of the three countries as the result of the recent amendment of the Atomic Energy Act and it will be advantageous to confine initial discussions of the Agency and its problems to this small group.
Subsequently, as plans for the Agency are tentatively agreed on by the CPC countries, a larger international working group might be constituted. The seven countries consulted on August 18 regarding the decision to proceed with an Agency in the absence of Soviet participation might appropriately be represented on the working group. Other countries might be added in order to avoid the appearance of exclusiveness and also to broaden such a group, now including the principal colonial powers plus a non-UN member and [Page 1514] another state (South Africa) not popular with many Asian and African countries. It was recognized that it would be difficult to select additional members of the working group from the many interested countries, whereas the initial seven can be justified by their status as raw materials producers or consumers.
Procedures
It was agreed that representatives of the UK and Canada would be invited to discuss plans for the Agency immediately. A preliminary draft outline of the organization and functions of the Agency will be furnished the UK and Canada, in order that the ideas of the UK and Canada might be obtained at the outset. The US plans for an approach to the UN will be described in order to solicit the comments and support of the UK and Canada. Planning and problems related to the formation of the Agency and to the scientific conference will be described and discussed, as well as the proposed schedule and the US feeling of urgency. US plans for an interim assistance program will also be described to the UK and Canada and discussed with them at an appropriate time.
It was expected that, before the Secretary’s speech to the UN General Assembly and after agreement with the UK and Canada, the other five countries who were consulted on August 18 would be notified of the US position to be taken in the UN.
By about October 1, after agreement has been reached by the CPC countries and the US has reported initially to the UN, a working group might be constituted. Agreement by this working group on an outline of the organization and functions of the Agency would be sought by about November 15. Such an outline would serve as a basis for the drafting of a treaty or convention to be open to signature by interested nations in addition to those represented on the working group.
By about October 1 it might prove possible to transmit a note on the plans for the Agency (derived from the August 18 memorandum, the President’s Labor Day speech, and the remarks of the Secretary of State before the General Assembly) to the Embassies of all potential member nations. Such a note would advise other nations of planning for the Agency and indicate to them that their ideas on the role of the Agency would be welcome. Criticism from nations not on the working group might thus be forestalled, and other nations given a sense of participation.
When a treaty or convention has been drafted, it might be possible to convene a conference to formalize ratification (subject of course to Congressional action) in January 1955, or perhaps later in the year at the time of the international scientific conference.