Foreign Relations of the United States, 1947, General; The United Nations, Volume I

Department of State Disarmament Files

Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of International Security Affairs (Johnson) to the Under Secretary of State (Acheson)

secret

[Washington,] May 9, 1947.

Subject: Information on Armed Forces for the Commission for Conventional Armaments (RAC D 15/1 attached)

Attached for your approval is a paper on this subject prepared by the Executive Committee on the Regulation of Armaments.¹ There is no need for you to read anything beyond the first three pages.

This paper has been submitted to the Joint Chiefs of Staff for comment and will subsequently be submitted to the Committee of Three in view of the fact that both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the three Secretaries approved the earlier position set forth in a memorandum of January 6.

The evidence indicates that Mr. Bard will probably feel that the position set forth in this paper still does not give him the leeway that he requires. It was the strong feeling of all the members of the Executive Committee, however, that there is no real need for the Commission to obtain information at the present time and that the only reason for agreeing to a request for any information is a tactical one; i.e., the strong evidence that other delegations will desire to have an immediate request and the danger that if we stand too pat, we will be unable to curb a request for information on armaments as well as armed forces.

During consideration of this paper by the Executive Committee the question of whether or not the United States should not now come out flatly for an adjournment of the Commission for Conventional Armaments until the world situation has changed, was raised in an acute form.²

Joseph E. Johnson

[Annex]

United States Position Concerning a Request by the Commission for Conventional Armaments for Information on Existing Armaments and Armed Forces

RAC D–15/1

May 6, 1947.

i. the problem

The problem is to re-examine the United States position with respect to furnishing information on armaments and armed forces in connection with the work of the Commission for Conventional Armaments, with a view to determining whether that position should be changed in the light of developments since it was established on January 6, 1947.

ii. facts bearing on the problem

See Appendix A.³

iii. discussion

See Appendix B.

iv. conclusions

It is concluded that:

a. Information on armed forces and armaments is not necessary to the work of the Commission for Conventional Armaments except as it may be related to a specific plan.

b. Nevertheless, it is quite likely that there will be a move in the Commission for Conventional Armaments to initiate a request for information on armed forces and armaments at an early stage in its work.

c. Disclosure of information on numbers of armed forces would not adversely affect the security interests of the United States provided that information on composition and disposition of units is not required.

d. Taking all considerations into account the advantages of acquiescing in a request for information on armed forces (as distinguished from armaments) seem to outweigh the disadvantages.

e. The United States should oppose any proposal requesting information on armaments in connection with the work of the CCA even if accompanied by verification. Such information should be required only as a part of an overall program for the regulation and reduction of armaments.

v. recommendations

It is recommended that:

a. The above conclusions be approved.

b. The United States Representative on the Commission for Conventional Armaments be instructed

1. To emphasize the United States view on all appropriate occasions that information on armed forces and armaments is not necessary to the work of the Commission for Conventional Armaments except as it may be related to a specific plan.

2. To oppose strongly any request for information on armaments to the CCA.

3. For the present not to support a request for information on armed forces but not to vote against such a request if the majority of the CCA favor it.

4. To lend his support to a request for information on armed forces provided that in so doing he is able to gain the assurance that the United States position set forth in b.2. above will be accepted.

c. A copy of this paper be forwarded to the United States Mission to the United Nations.

1. In a marginal notation, Acheson indicated that he approved the paper going forward.
2. Opposite the last paragraph, Acheson wrote “How can one present this idea as a practical matter?”
3. The appendices are not printed.