Office of the Historian

476. Telegram From the Department of State to the Mission at the United Nations1

Washington, December 10, 1959—4:19 p.m.

Gadel 179. Re Outer Space. Department has studied carefully results your latest discussions with Kuznetsov.2 Our impression is that Kuznetsov realizes fully we are now at near breaking point. While we appreciate tedious nature discussions and difficulties involved in having to cover same ground over and over again, we nevertheless believe it important for you to follow up your discussion of yesterday by repeating firmly same proposal to Kuznetsov as was made yesterday. We believe Soviets are not in any better position to break on this matter than we are and yesterday’s discussion might have shaken Kuznetsov. In your discussion:

1.
You should first ask Kuznetsov whether he has anything to say in light yesterday’s conversations or has any new proposal to make.
2.
After that, you should inform him that you have transmitted results your two discussions with Kuznetsov yesterday and Department position remains as stated yesterday.
3.
Indonesia, Finland or Afghanistan as fifth neutral unacceptable. We note in this connection that Kuznetsov had said he fails understand why US was “so stubborn on this very minor matter.” We do not view this as minor matter, for reason already stated. If this minor matter and Kuznetsov “incredulous” that ChiCom issue is of central importance, why are Soviets refusing to make concession? We doubt they want an agreement. With exception of Austria (which still appears unsettled, since Soviets are linking it to Conference issue), and possibly Finland, Soviets have not been willing either to accept or propose any neutral which it does not believe to be more favorable to its own viewpoint than to ours. (FYI Those neutrals proposed by Soviets include Indonesia, Finland, Afghanistan, India, UAR, Sweden, all of whom vote negatively on Chinese representation issue. On assumption that Austria and one of our three-named neutrals was accepted, balance of neutrals on basis of Soviet view is three to two in their favor. End FYI.)
4.
As minor matter you should recall Kuznetsov has objected to para 1 (iii). Accordingly, believe you should seek modifications previously authorized in Gadel 153.3
5.
If Soviets put forward no new proposal or are unwilling accept our proposal, you should urge Kuznetsov to seek further instructions.
6.
If Kuznetsov does not accept our proposal of yesterday, you authorized at stage you deem appropriate (either at same meeting or at subsequent meeting) to put forth proposal contained in next following telegram.4
Herter
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 320.5701/12–1059. Confidential; Niact. Drafted by Sisco; cleared by Farley, Nunley, Wilcox, and FE; and initialed by Herter.↩
  2. See supra. Lodge also met briefly and without success with Kuznetsov during the morning of December 9. (Delga 669 from USUN, December 9; Department of State, Central Files, 320.5701/12–1059)↩
  3. Dated November 30. (Ibid., 320.5701/11–2859)↩
  4. Gadel 180, December 10 (4:21 p.m.). (Ibid., 320.7501/12–1059)↩