Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XI, Arms Control and Disarmament

82. Telegram From the Mission to the United Nations to the Department of State¹

New York, June 15, 1965, 2345Z.

5028. Subject: Disarmament. After DC meeting this p.m.,² Foster and Tsarapkin discussed resumption ENDC. Foster recalled ENDC decision that co-chairmen should consult on resumption date conclusion disarmament discussion at UN and then consult with other ENDC members.

Tsarapkin said Sovs do not object to ENDC resumption in principle. Noted, however, he had mixed feelings about resumption when no agreement and only fruitless discussion in prospect. Inquired whether today’s NYT story about new US proposals was a leak and asked Foster to give at least some indication of what US planned to do if ENDC reconvened. Foster referred to his reply to Syrian Rep today (see septel),³ noting US had attempted produce new ideas and proposals at every past ENDC session and would make every effort to do so in future as well. Pointed out even if next ENDC session produced no specific agreement, discussions would be useful and certainly more constructive than those at current DC session. In course brief discussion of US proposed freeze on SNV,⁴ Tsarapkin reiterated freeze out of question since it would involve control. Said Gomulka Plan,⁵ while also providing for freeze, quite different inasmuch it would not involve control on either US or Soviet territory.

In response Tsarapkin query, Foster suggested July 6 or 13 as suitable date for ENDC resumption. Tsarapkin said would report to his govt and in view his departure for Moscow June 17 respond through Dobrynin in Washington. When we asked what other ENDC members should be told at this time, Tsarapkin suggested we say co-chairmen have agreed to ENDC resumption in principle but resumption date subject further consultations. Suggested that once US-Sov agreement on resumption date reached, it would be easier for US to get in touch with other ENDC members via NY and obtain their reactions.

Throughout conversation, Tsarapkin carefully avoided committing himself to early ENDC resumption. When we pointed out non-aligned Res, which adopted today, envisaged an ENDC session before 20th GA, he said Sovs had abstained on that Res and therefore were not bound by it.⁶

Stevenson

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, DEF 18 UN. Confidential. Reported to Geneva. Beginning in May 1965, the dates and transmission times of all incoming Department of State telegrams were in six-figure date-time groups. The “Z” refers to Greenwich mean time.
2. The U.N. Disarmament Commission, consisting of all U.N. members met in New York, April 21-June 16, 1965.
3. Not found.
4. In his message of January 21, 1964, to the Eighteen-Nation Disarmament Committee, President Johnson proposed that “the United States, the Soviet Union and their respective Allies should agree to explore a verified freeze of the number and characteristics of strategic nuclear offensive and defensive vehicles.” (Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1964, Book I, pp. 171-172)
5. The Gomulka Plan to freeze nuclear and thermonuclear armaments in Central Europe was proposed by Wladyslaw Gomulka, First Secretary of the Central Committee, United Worker’s Party of Poland, in a speech in Plock, Poland, December 28, 1963. (Documents on Disarmament, 1963, pp. 651-652) A memorandum by the Polish Government transmitted through diplomatic channels, February 24, 1964, outlined the proposal. (Ibid., 1964, pp. 53-54)
6. In pursuance of Resolution DC/225, adopted by the U.N. Disarmament Commission on June 15, 1965 (ibid., 1965, pp. 260-262), the Eighteen-Nation Disarmament Committee reconvened in Geneva on July 27, 1965.