Office of the Historian

261. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom1

Washington, July 22, 1957—6:06 p.m.

662. For Stassen from Secretary. While it is true that policy directive does not use the word “coterminous”, it speaks of “an aerial and ground inspection system” and “the aerial and ground inspection system”.2 Uniform coupling of aerial and ground inspection in a single [Page 663] zone or system makes it we think abundantly clear that US position is that the two must be combined and that one without the other is not adequate.

Defense and CIA feel strongly on this point and State while having no independent position on the merits agrees with their interpretation of the President’s June 11 Directive.

If you question this we will of course raise it with the President and put any viewpoint you may wish to have before him but I doubt this would be a necessary or useful exercise.

We of course do not impose our views upon others and para. 10 expressly leaves to the Western European nations the initiative with respect to types of inspection. But I do not think there should be any doubt in minds of our allies and most importantly in mind of Soviet Union that we consider ground and air inspection a related whole and that insofar as relates to reciprocal US and Soviet zones will insist upon it. We have already indicated, Deptel 221,3 that if Canada willing accept only aerial overflight we would be prepared to have them join on this basis, and we would of course consider the views of our other allies if they felt differently about any inspection zone which involved them.

Dulles
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 330.13/7–2257. Secret; Priority. Drafted by Dulles, this telegram is apparently in response to telegram 593 from London, July 21, which explained “the reasons for the rather generalized language on the relationship of aerial and ground inspection in the four power reports to NATO.” (Ibid., 330.13/7–2157)↩
  2. See paragraph 9 of the June 11 position paper, Document 237.↩
  3. Telegram 221 to London, July 9, not printed. (Ibid., 330.13/7–957)↩