600.0012/11–1054: Telegram
The United States Representative at the United Nations (Lodge) to the Department of State
priority
Delga 209. Subject: Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy. Menon spoke to me before the opening of Committee One debate today to record his government’s unofficial disapproval at India’s not being consulted regarding negotiations on establishment International Atomic Energy Agency. He said India possessed tremendous resources in this field, referring as example to recent sale of 200 tons thorium nitrate to US (a sale which he described as contrary to Indian neutrality policy). As further example he pointed to fact that leading individual in research on use of isotopes for cancer was Indian. Menon did not wish exaggerate his protest and was not instructed to present these views in writing. He did, however, wish to register them in this way.
Menon then took up question of current GA debate on peaceful uses.1 He said he planned to file no formal amendments to resolution we have co-sponsored but urged our earnest consideration of certain suggestions to which he attached importance. Menon expressed strong view that conference of governments should be held to consider draft treaty creating agency for peaceful uses after treaty negotiated out by eight countries now engaged in this process. He referred to conference as one which would be held just prior to ratification of the treaty and he spoke of conference function as being to endorse draft treaty brought in by 8 negotiating powers.
Menon did not specifically state that treaty should be signed at close of conference by all conference participants who wished to sign. However, he expressly drew the analogy of the Japanese [Page 1555] Peace Conference at San Francisco. Menon did not make it clear whether he favored either:
- a)
- A treaty to be signed at the end of conference by large number of countries; or
- b)
- A treaty endorsed by conference and then signed and ratified by small number of countries with treaty immediately open to accession by others.
Menon, upon my pressing him, agreed that conference he had in mind should not take longer than seven days.
I told Menon that, speaking personally and entirely without instructions, a conference such as his and with such a worthy purpose would be worth considering if it were not a negotiating conference and would involve no delay either in the actual creation of the agency or in the beginning of the agency’s actual operations. I expressed appreciation for Menon’s statement that he did not plan to introduce any amendments in the First Committee, and agreed with him that he should feel free to talk to the UK and US about the peaceful uses item at any time.
Hope you will study feasibility of short inter-governmental conference like San Francisco Conference on Japanese Peace Treaty without producing any material delay in creation and actual functioning of agency. Conference would meet desires of many countries for increased sense of participation in planning for and establishing new Atomic Energy Agency. At same time it must be clear that US and small number of other principal contributing countries now engaged in negotiations would, as practical matter, completely control contents of treaty creating agency.
- Reference is to the ongoing discussion in Committee I, generated by the seven-nation “Draft Resolution on Atomic Energy Plan”, and submitted to the General Assembly on Nov. 6 (see the second editorial note, p. 1551). Lodge reported on these discussions in detail in various Delga telegrams found in files 310.5 and 600.0012.↩