Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Regulation of Armaments; Atomic Energy, Volume XX

139. Telegram From the Embassy in the United Kingdom to the Department of State¹

London, April 29, 1956—7 p.m.

4955. From: USDEL Disarmament Subcommittee Disarmament 132. Dept pass Peaslee, DOD, USIA, AEC. Paris pass USRO. USSR Delegation–US Delegation bilateral session held Lancaster House, 11 am, April 28th with full agreement Western Four. US transcript of notes being pouched.²

Highlights

1. Stassen posed direct question of Soviet agreement test demonstration including aerial and technical exchange program proposals. Requested agreement technical representatives meet May 28th to work out details. Stated if Soviets wished to make concrete proposal for combining Eisenhower test demonstration including aerial and technical exchange mission with small token and symbolic reductions US would give careful consideration.

2. Stassen explored Soviet differences on voting procedure and on moving from stage to stage. Gromyko clarified Soviet view armament control organization should have only routine powers exercised by majority vote and all substantive matters go to Security Council thus safeguarding rights major powers. Also stated, of course, agreement would not be implemented if at any point any major power not satisfied.

3. Gromyko complained US paper³ inflates control question so that control becomes main issue of paper.

4. Gromyko raised question of 15 percent reduction of military budgets, section IV March 27.⁴ Replied to question indicating no inspection contemplated but verification of basis for comparing military budgets could be examined. Stassen outlined US views against such and uninspected armaments budget reduction agreement.

5. Gromyko raised question of other partial steps referring to Germany. Stassen recalled Nutting’s negative response in subcommitee⁵ and reaffirmed US support of this response and opposition to Soviet proposals.

6. Gromyko raised question of prohibition of thermo-nuclear tests. Emphasized desirability of such an agreement if no other arms agreement possible for fairly lengthy period of time and stated thermo-nuclear test ban would at least do something to prevent or minimize problem of many other countries requiring thermo-nuclear weapons. Stassen spelled out the US opposition and US position.

7. Agreed to meet again Lancaster House, Monday, April 30th, 3 pm to explore other points in Soviet March 27th and US April 3rd papers.

Note: Gromyko was more forthcoming in giving Soviet reasons and analysis on issues than at any previous time in either subcommittee or bilateral discussions.

Barbour

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 330.13/4–2956. Secret; Priority. Repeated to Paris and Bonn and pouched to Ottawa.
2. Not found in Department of State files.
3. The U.S. paper, submitted to the subcommittee on April 3, is printed in Documents on Disarmament, 1945–1959, vol. I, pp. 608–613.
4. For section IV of the Soviet proposal submitted to the subcommittee on March 27, see ibid., p. 607.
5. Nutting’s response on the German question is contained in the verbatim record of the 82d meeting of the subcommittee. (Department of State, IO Files: Lot 70 A 6871, DC/SC.1/PV.82, pp. 38–40)