300. Editorial Note
In his memorandum “Recent Chronology re IRBM Agreement,” July 8, Martin M. Tank, Deputy Director of the International Cooperation Administration Mission in London, noted that Secretary of Defense Wilson had sent a draft agreement on the deployment of U.S. missiles in the United Kingdom to Minister of Defense Sandys on April 18:
“The agreement in essence proposes the deployment in the UK of four squadrons of 15 IRBM missiles each, ultimately to be under UK operational control. The US is to provide the missiles and train appropriate UK personnel. The UK is to provide the sites and prepare them at mutually agreed locations. The US is to continue development of major technical components with a determination of ‘adequate development for service use’ to be discussed. There will also be discussion of duplication of effort problems. The US makes clear warheads are not included, but undertakes to store warheads in the UK for missiles made available to the UK. The missiles are to be deployed in the UK [Page 778] except as may be otherwise agreed. The US may substitute improved performance missiles. The US may maintain in the UK a similar number under its own operation and control, and wishes sympathetic consideration for future requests for deployment in the UK and other UK-controlled territory.”
Sandys replied on behalf of the British Government on June 11:
“Sandys’ reply accepts US draft as basis for negotiation; requests agreement to send team of experts to Washington to settle technical and operational questions, and informs that UK Embassy Washington will be ready to discuss policy matters. Annex lists points requiring further discussion. The points include UK desires: (a) to know more of dollar and sterling cost of the project; (b) US intentions to pursue development IRBM from 1500–2000-mile range; (c) that when further developed, previously supplied weapons will be replaced; (d) that there be no dollar cost to UK; (e) that deployment sites of missiles under US control are to be mutually agreed; (f) that arrangements be made to govern the operational use of missiles deployed by the US in the UK; [(g)] that detailed info of technical operational and logistic characteristics of the weapons be provided to the UK.”
It became clear, during discussions between the U.S. Air Force and the Royal Air Force in Washington, June 27–29, that the United States could not respond to Sandys’ reply until joint technical reports had been completed. Pending receipt of these reports, consideration of how to finance the IRBM project continued within the U.S. Government; it was decided that uncommitted Plan K funds would be used. (Department of State, London Embassy Files: Lot 61 F 14, IRBM)