77. Circular Telegram From the Department of State to All Diplomatic Missions1
339. In view propaganda being made by Communists in relation to launching of satellite and their effort to stir up somewhat panicky reactions, we think it useful give you for background our estimate of situation.
Soviet satellite is of military importance only in sense that advancement of science in long run contributes to military technology. While Soviet satellite does not meet all of the scientific objectives, its values are scientific rather than military. Efforts to capitalize on Soviet satellite for cold war purposes should be discounted. Our own satellite program has, from start, been directed toward scientific purposes. You will have noted the President’s statement October 9 that he “considers our country’s satellite program well designed and properly scheduled to achieve the scientific purposes for which it was initiated”2
Soviets exploited the German assets, human and material, which they removed after World War II from Pennemunde, Germany and appear to have given this line of development both in its ballistic missile and satellite applications the highest priority of their military work over past twelve years. In vital air/atomic area we believe that Soviet Union now is, and for some time will continue to be, in a position of relative inferiority. From Mr. Khrushchev’s recent speeches as quoted in press, and particularly his statement that “fighter and bomber planes can be put in museums”, it would appear that he is trying to cover up on a relatively weak long-range bomber position. By attempting to jump long-range bomber stage he would avoid bearing at same time expense of a large bomber and missile development. It is unlikely however that he will have for some time an atomic delivery capability in the very long-range missiles which would be an adequate counterpart for the large number of bombers capable of reaching Soviet Union now in possession of United States.
We believe Soviet propaganda is in large measure designed to cover up this period of relative weakness which may exist for several years. Even if Soviet claims about long-range missiles are [Page 168] fully substantiated we believe that time difference between their operational capability in this area and our own will be minor and that at least in meantime we will have a distinct superiority with our long-range bomber force.
You should not feel or allow anyone to feel that United States is in a position of relative weakness. It is quite the contrary. Our foreign policy should reflect the basic sense of confidence which we feel in the military posture of our country.
It should be noted that proposals of the four Western Powers regarding control of sending objects through outer space as part of a disarmament agreement were introduced in London in August. These proposals thus antedate announcement of Soviet earth satellite and are not a response to it.
Your attention is also invited to statement by the President October 9 providing a summary of important facts in development by United States of an earth satellite. This is being communicated to all posts through USIA channels.
(Following paragraph should be added to this message for European and Middle East posts only.)
“It should be quite clear that in respect of European and Middle East apprehensions regarding Soviet attack by intermediate range ballistic missiles this would not occur without immediate overall reaction by United States. Such an attack would be completely unproductive unless US striking power was destroyed simultaneously.”
Each Chief of Mission is authorized to use substance foregoing locally in his discretion in a manner designed to best serve the US interest.
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 761.56301/10–1057. Official Use Only; Priority. Drafted by Dulles and Quarles, cleared with Allen Dulles and various bureaus and offices in the Department of State, and signed by Murphy on behalf of Acting Secretary Herter. Secretary Dulles left Washington at 1:40 p.m. for a vacation at Watertown, New York; he returned to Washington on October 14.↩
- See footnote 7, supra.↩