Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Volume III, National Security Policy; Arms Control and Disarmament, Microfiche Supplement

455. Memorandum of Conversation¹

Washington, April 7, 1959

SUBJECT

• Surprise Attack Study

PARTICIPANTS

• Mr. Herter, Acting Secretary of State
• Mr. Quarles, Deputy Secretary of Defense
• Mr. Irwin, Assistant Secretary of Defense (ISA)
• Mr. Farley, S/AE

Mr. Quarles outlined the thinking of the Department of Defense regarding the proposed surprise attack study, as presented in his letter of March 10 to the Secretary of State. He emphasized particularly the way in which the proposed terms of reference for the surprise attack study broadened out into basic disarmament issues and the need for a review of present U.S. disarmament policy. He stressed also the special interest of the Departments of State and Defense in disarmament matters.

Mr. Herter said that he personally had come to the conclusion that it was important to have a review of U.S. disarmament policy. A very practical problem was that it was difficult for the State Department to release the type of officer needed for such a fundamental policy review in view of the existing demands on the personnel of the Department and the limitations of funds. For this reason, among others, the Department had been eager to take advantage of the interest shown by Mr. William Foster in pursuing the avenues of study opened up during the surprise attack conference with the Soviet Union and the preceding period of preparation. Mr. Farley pointed out that the Department’s proposal for a study specifically directed at the surprise attack problem was motivated by the considerations that the surprise attack talks with the Soviet Union were formally in recess rather than broken off and that we needed to be prepared in event there was occasion to resume them; in addition, the study would be useful since it bore on many of the problems now being considered in connection with the European security aspects of forthcoming negotiations.

Mr. Quarles expressed appreciation for the staffing problem for any broad disarmament review. He thought that the Department of Defense might be able to help in finding the funds for outside consultants or participants and that studies which the State Department desired might be placed with such organizations as the Rand Corporation if State Department funds for this purpose were not available. With regard to Mr. Farley’s point, he raised the possibility that, in the broad disarmament policy review, special early attention might be given to the surprise attack aspects.

Mr. Herter suggested that as a next steps a draft terms of reference be drawn up for a broad disarmament policy review.

1. Source: Discussion of proposed surprise attack study. Confidential. 2 pp. NARA, RG 59, Secretary’s Memoranda of Conversation: Lot 64 D 199.