261. Memorandum of Conversation1
PARTICIPANTS
-
US
- The Secretary
- Under Secretary Philip Habib
- Ambassador Arthur A. Hartman
- Assistant Secretary George S. Vest
- James F. Dobbins, EUR/WE
- (Notetaker)
-
FRANCE
- Louis de Guiringaud, Foreign
- Minister
- Francois de Laboulaye, Political
- Director
Pakistan and Non-Proliferation
De Guiringaud related that, in a meeting on September 8 with Pakistani Foreign Minister Aga Shahi,2 he had told Aga Shahi that [Page 632] France had a contract to furnish Pakistan with a plant which was capable of reprocessing used nuclear fuel in a manner that would enable it to be used again to fuel reactors. He had then proposed to have plans for this plant restructured, along the lines de Guiringaud had earlier discussed with Ambassador Hartman.3 De Guiringaud told Aga Shahi that the French government would, in due course, open conversations with Pakistan to rewrite certain parts of the agreement.
Aga Shahi had been very surprised, de Guiringaud said. De Guiringaud had been forced to endure an hour-long series of complaints about discrimination against Pakistan, vis-a-vis India, in the nuclear field. Aga Shahi had talked about the Canadian and US assistance to India in the nuclear field, including assistance on breeder technology. He claimed that India had been able to become a nuclear power as a result of such assistance. He had insisted that Pakistan must receive treatment comparable to that given India. Something must be done for Pakistan or assistance to India must be cut back.
De Guiringaud said that he had, as a result of this conversation, initiated a study of France’s nuclear relationship with India. The Secretary said that he would have a paper prepared for de Guiringaud outlining the current state of the US nuclear relationship with India. He said that the United States had agreed to provide a certain amount of fuel for the Tarapur reactor. The United States had also talked to India about the need to accept full-scope safeguards. The Indians had agreed to consider this seriously. Habib added that there had been some general discussion on this issue with Desai who had indicated that the Indians would not conduct further nuclear tests. The Secretary said that Desai personally had been clear on this, and that he rejected testing. De Guiringaud noted, however, that not all of Desai’s subordinates were in agreement with his position, nor was Desai necessarily capable of controlling these people.
De Guiringaud said that Aga Shahi had asked, during the period before the Pakistani elections, that the French government not do anything to give the impression that the contract was not going forward without change. De Guiringaud had agreed to this request. He agreed that if it became known that pressure was being applied on Pakistan this would become an election issue which Bhutto might well make use of. (De Guiringaud also said that Aga Shahi had conveyed a clear impression that he felt that some of the charges against Bhutto, including one of murder, were not without substance.)
[Page 633]De Guiringaud asked that the contents of this conversation with Aga Shahi be kept absolutely confidential. The Secretary promised to do so.
De Guiringaud recalled that Ambassador Hartman had asked whether there had been any transfers from France of equipment for the Pakistani reprocessing plant after August 4.4 He said that the French government had last authorized transfers of such equipment on July 16. Such authorizations were valid for six months, and there was no way of determining within that period when items authorized were shipped.
[Omitted here is material unrelated to Pakistan.]
- Source: Department of State, Office of the Secretariat Staff, Cyrus R. Vance, Secretary of State—1977–1980, Lot 84D241, Box 10, [untitled folder]. Secret; Nodis. Drafted by Dobbins; cleared by Vest; approved in S/S. The meeting took place in Vance’s office.↩
- According to telegram 26348 from Paris, September 10, de Guiringaud’s meeting with Shahi took place on September 7. See footnote 2, Document 260.↩
- See footnote 3, Document 260.↩
- See footnote 3, Document 259.↩