Eisenhower Library, Eisenhower papers, Whitman file
Memorandum of Discussion at the 170th Meeting of the National Security Council, Thursday, November 12, 19531
eyes only
[Extract]
Present at the 170th meeting of the Council were the President of the United States, presiding; the Secretary of State; the Secretary of Defense; the Acting Director, Foreign Operations Administration; and the Director, Office of Defense Mobilization. The Vice President was out of the country and so did not attend this meeting. [Page 1245] Also present were the Secretary of the Treasury; the Acting Secretary of the Interior (for Item 1); the Secretary of Commerce (for Item 1); the Director, Bureau of the Budget; the Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission (for Items 2, 4 and 5); the Secretary of the Navy (for Item 1); Robert Murray and Louis Rothschild, of the Department of Commerce (for Item 1); Robert Finley, Office of Defense Mobilization (for Item 1); General Ridgway for the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff; the Director of Central Intelligence; The Assistant to the President; Robert Cutler, Special Assistant to the President; C. D. Jackson, Special Assistant to the President; the Acting White House Staff Secretary; the Executive Secretary, NSC; and the Deputy Executive Secretary, NSC.
There follows a summary of the discussion at the meeting and the chief points taken.
. . . . . . .
4. U.S. Position With Respect to the Regulation, Limitation, and Balanced Reduction of Armed Forces and Armaments (NSC Actions Nos. 899 and 909; NSC 112 and NSC 112/1)2
Following a brief introduction by Mr. Cutler, Mr. Strauss stated that before making his report in response to NSC Action No. 899–c, there were one or two other points about which he wished to speak. He reminded the Council that at a recent meeting regret had been expressed that the terms of the existing atomic energy law so drastically limited the exchange of information on atomic energy with our British and Canadian allies. He was therefore glad to be able to inform the Council that ways and means had been found within the existing statute to effect an exchange of data with the governments of these two countries on the effects of atomic weapons. Accordingly, and if the President agreed, Mr. Strauss said that discussions would be arranged with the British and the Canadians which would prove especially helpful in the area of civilian defense.
Secretary Dulles commented that while he was uncertain as yet what precisely would be discussed at the forthcoming Bermuda Conference, there was a strong possibility that exchange of information between the British and U.S. Governments on atomic energy matters would be raised. Accordingly, he was anxious to know what the prospects were that the Congress would act favorably in amending the Act of 1946 to permit more latitude on the exchange of information.
Mr. Strauss replied that if nothing unforeseen occurred, he anticipated favorable action by the Congress. Congress had been on [Page 1246] the point of doing this earlier, when the Fuchs case intervened to prevent further consideration. A prerequisite, however, to favorable Congressional action would be the completion by the British of improvements in their security system for safeguarding atomic energy information. This process had been started but was not yet complete. Canadian security in this field was as effective as our own.
Mr. Strauss then said he had one more matter before beginning to make his report. This was to tell the Council that the Atomic Energy Commission was announcing at twelve noon today that it would be unnecessary to build an additional facility in Illinois, with a consequent saving of $30 million in capital outlay and $3 million of annual expenditure for operations. Nearly everybody, thought Mr. Strauss, would be cheered by this news, although he was apprehensive of the reaction of Senators Dirksen and Douglas,3 in whose jurisdiction the facility would have been built.
The President said he doubted if there would be much trouble from these two Senators.
Mr. Strauss then launched into a discussion of his disarmament plan. He noted that thus far the Departments of State and Defense have not sponsored this plan, although it was quite possible that they would do so shortly. The germ of the idea, continued Mr. Strauss, derived from a conversation with the President in which the latter had suggested the possibility of creating a stockpile, or “bank”, containing fissionable material.
At this point the Secretary of State inquired whether it was necessary that Mr. Strauss’ proposal be kept secret if it were to have any hope of adoption.
Mr. Strauss replied that secrecy was absolutely vital, and that if news of the proposal leaked out prior to its consideration in the UN, there would be no hope of success.
In that case, said Mr. Cutler, it might be better to postpone Mr. Strauss’ briefing and Council discussion of the matter until the Secretaries of State and Defense had had an opportunity to study and concur in the proposal being presented by Mr. Strauss.
The National Security Council:4
- a.
- Deferred discussion on the above subject pending study by the Secretaries of State and Defense of the tentative proposals by the Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission.
- b.
- Noted an oral report by the Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission, that a method has been developed, within the terms of the [Page 1247] Atomic Energy Act, for exchanging with the United Kingdom and Canada information on the effects of atomic weapons.
. . . . . . .
- Prepared by Deputy Executive Secretary Gleason on Nov. 13.↩
- For NSC 112/1, Sept. 1, see p. 1190. For NSC Action No. 899, see footnote 3, p. 1212. For Action No. 909, see footnote 4, p. 1218. For NSC 112, July 6, 1951, see Foreign Relations, 1951, vol. i, p. 477.↩
- Everett McKinley Dirksen and Paul H. Douglas of Illinois.↩
- Paragraphs a–b constitute NSC Action No. 959, Nov. 12, 1953. (S/S–NSC files, lot 66 D 95, “NSC Records of Action”)↩