381. Memorandum From Breithut (S/AE) to John Foster Dulles1
SUBJECT
- Your 4:30 p.m. Meeting with AEC Chairman McCone
We understand that Mr. McCone will raise the two topics discussed below. (Cf. Paris telegram 821, September 6—TAB A).
[Typeset Page 1445]REVIEW OF HIS GENEVA TALKS ON THE IAEA
Talks with the U.K., French, Indian and Soviet representatives have reinforced McCone’s concern regarding the future of the Agency. The following have been cited as significant problems:
1. The slow progress of the Agency’s program: Although the Agency’s functions embrace the entire field of the peaceful uses of atomic energy, public attention has focused to a significant extent on its role in the development of atomic power particularly in the underdeveloped areas. Expectations and aspirations in this field have greatly exceeded reasonable prospects for early progress. A growing realization that the Agency is unlikely to bring about the swift initiation of atomic power projects in underdeveloped areas has led to some slackening of the earlier ardent interest in the Agency of underdeveloped nations. The trend toward more conservative appraisals of the early prospects for atomic power in underdeveloped areas was reinforced by a number of technical papers at the Geneva Conference. Although the Department does not wish the U.S. to make statements and take positions in the IAEA which will promote extravagant expectations doomed to disappointment, Governor Herter has written Chairman McCone emphasizing the importance of making atomic power a principal theme of the U.S. representative’s statement at the Second Geneva Conference (TAB B).
2. Role of the IAEA and other U.N. organizations: Mr. McCone is concerned with regard to activities of the U.N. and the specialized agencies which appear to be potentially in conflict with the functions assigned the IAEA by its Charter, and speeches by some of the participants at the Geneva Peaceful Uses Conference have heightened his concern. He may also refer to Secretary General Hammarskjold’s report suggesting that the U.N. Radiation Committee might be given operating responsibilities and to resistance to the idea favored by the U.S. of the IAEA’s sponsoring future Peaceful Uses Conferences.
We believe that the question of IAEA relationship with the U.N. and the specialized agencies is not a major problem, in spite of certain current frictions. Relationship agreements with ILO, UNESCO, and FAO satisfactory to the IAEA have recently been negotiated and will be submitted to the Second General Conference for approval; and we believe the IAEA can expand its present activities or add new activities in the field of peaceful uses of atomic energy without running into any serious conflict with the specialized agencies. We consider that IAEA should sponsor any future Peaceful Uses Conferences, and [Facsimile Page 2] that the U.S. should oppose in the Thirteenth General Assembly establishment of operational responsibilities for the U.N. Radiation Committee. IO is prepared to discuss these questions further with Mr. McCone in detail at his convenience after he has talked to you. The basic problem of the IAEA is to develop a significant program of its own. If this is done, the problem of the relationship of the IAEA to the U.N. and the specialized [Typeset Page 1446] agencies will be placed in proper perspective and the tension surrounding these problems will tend to disappear.
3. Level and caliber of national representatives to the Agency: Many governments are sending medium or low level diplomatic personnel to Board meetings and are showing signs of reducing the caliber of future representation. We are pressing a plan to facilitate future high-caliber participation by holding less frequent and shorter Board meetings in the future and have solicited appropriate capitals for support (TAB C). The level of the U.S. diplomatic and technical delegation is appropriate. The Soviet representative has long been pressing for an advisory committee to the IAEA consisting of scientists of international reputation but the U.S. has resisted the establishment of such a committee as it might jeopardize the role of the Board of Governors and ultimately damage, rather than aid, the Agency.
It might be useful to emphasize the importance of Chairman McCone’s presence in Vienna during the opening days of the Second General Conference of the IAEA regardless of the positions the U.S. may find it necessary to take on the issues arising.
HIS TALKS WITH PERRIN, FRENCH HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR ATOMIC ENERGY
McCone reports that Perrin indicates that the French want (a) information on fuel to guide them in building a gaseous diffusion plant, (b) design information, or (c) alternatively, a submarine reactor which they feel was promised them last December. We have made it clear to the French that it is not legally possible for us to provide Restricted Data or a submarine reactor to them until a bilateral agreement has been concluded and has laid before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy for 60 days. A U.S. team will visit Paris in mid-September to survey French security. A technical team will also have exploratory discussions of the possible scope of a French agreement. However, State and AEC agree that we cannot now answer most of the technical questions submitted to us by the French.
You may wish to emphasize to Chairman McCone the high political importance of the successful completion of a bilateral agreement with the French enabling us to aid them with their nuclear submarine program, assuming security guarantees are adequate. Thus far the AEC and DOD have been fully cooperating with the Department in doing all that can be done to promote progress toward its completion.
- Source: Briefing for meeting with McCone: IAEA, U.S.-French exchanges. Secret. 2 pp. NARA, RG 59, Atomic Energy Files: Lot 57 D 688, IAEA–General.↩