Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, United Nations and General International Matters, Volume II

312. Memorandum From the Head of the Delegation to the Conference on Antarctica (Phleger) to the Secretary of State¹

Washington, November 16, 1959.

At the meeting of Heads of Delegations this morning the following matters were dealt with:

1. The Article on jurisdiction was agreed to subject to a final French check with its legal adviser.

2. Accession. In response to questions the Soviet delegate made clear that its amendment required that an invitation to other than a member of the United Nations could only be by unanimous act of the parties entitled to representation under Article VIII. Various delegates thought that it was better to make this clear in the article on accession than to attempt to cover it by an amendment to Article VIII. The U.S. reserved its position and so did some other delegations. However, it seemed rather clear that the accession formulation as above would meet with agreement by all parties if the U.S. were to accept it.

3. The Argentinian representative reported that he had been instructed to accept Article II as formulated provided there was an acceptable provision barring nuclear explosions. He then proposed a nuclear provision that would read:

“Nuclear or thermo-nuclear explosions shall not take place south of 60 degrees South except after unanimous consent of the contracting parties entitled to representation under Article VIII.”

It was pointed out that this formulation included the high seas south of 60 degrees South which had been excluded in the zone of application. There was considerable discussion on this point and the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Belgian, Japanese and French representatives indicated that they did not want the nuclear prohibition to apply to the high seas. The UK stated that it could accept a prohibition limited to Antarctica but would have to ask further instructions on the Argentine proposal. The Soviet and Chilean representatives said they would accept the Argentine proposal.

All except the Soviet indicated that they desired the inclusion of a provision permitting nuclear explosions upon unanimous consent. The Soviet representative said that it was a complicated matter and he was not in a position to state his delegation’s position at this time. He made an argument that the unanimous consent provision might not be desirable but it was clear that the other delegations held a contrary view.

The meeting adjourned until 10:30 tomorrow morning. It was hoped that all representatives would have further instructions at that time on the above items.

The U.S. delegation desires your instructions on both the above points.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 399.829/11–1659. Confidential. Drafted and initialed by Phleger.