Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Regulation of Armaments; Atomic Energy, Volume XX

192. Letter From the President’s Special Assistant (Stassen) to the Secretary of State¹

London, May 5, 1957.

Dear Foster: Since our conferences in Washington on April 20² and April 23,³ I have been following through on the guidance and directives which you gave me and have been concentrating on the priority US objectives which you outlined.⁴ The new Soviet paper which Zorin brought back from Moscow and handed to me on April 26 has been reviewed bilaterally and multilaterally. As you anticipated, the fourth country problem is an important mutual interest between the Soviet Union and the United States.

It is clear that the new Soviet paper is a negotiating document and the Soviet Union will move on any of the provisions, but does have important limits on the amount it will move in the total situation and limits on some specific provisions.

We now have quite a clear view of the kind of partial agreement which would on balance be acceptable to France and the Federal Republic of Germany and other key non-nuclear countries, to the USSR, and to the UK; and which would serve the priority US objectives without an excessive price, and thus, on balance would be in the US national interest.

I also have views on the method of negotiation from this point forward which would yield the best chance of moving toward such a partial agreement. These will be further clarified after Monday’s sessions and Tuesday’s US Delegation review.⁵

If you were so inclined, I would like to go over both the substance of such a partial agreement and the negotiating method, with you personally, and reshape it with your counsel and direction, before submitting it to the Department concretely and before putting it into the interdepartmental consideration as you requested in Washington. If you think well of this, I believe I could get away from London at any time after our Wednesday afternoon session, May 8th, and could arrange on general grounds a four or five days recess of the Sub-Committee.⁶

The Soviet continues to show signs of some skepticism as to the US intentions in these negotiations. Your statement about carefully measured steps carefully taken has been of great assistance in drawing out the Soviet position. It is now quite definite that the Soviet will give consideration to our legitimate security concerns if the US will give consideration to their legitimate security concerns, and that the emphasis which you placed on mutual interest in certain situations is bringing about a favorable movement toward a partial agreement.

I know I need not emphasize that there remain very great difficulties in the way, as you are fully aware of this. But our US Delegation is now unanimous that we have reached a different situation than at any time before in the eleven years of talks, and that there are definite possibilities of advancing important US objectives.

Robert Bowie’s debriefing of the NATO sessions in relationship to our work was very helpful to our Delegation.⁷ Thank you for asking him to come over to London.

I trust you had a good trip to Bonn and have a pleasant flight back home. Reports here of your Bonn leadership have been excellent.

Sincerely,

Harold

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 600.0012/3–557. Top Secret; Personal.
2. See Document 183.
3. No record of this conference has been found in the Eisenhower Library or Department of State files.
4. No specific paper listing Dulles’ directives and priority U.S. directives has been found in the Eisenhower Library or Department of State files, but see Document 183. For Stassen’s review of Dulles’ priority objectives, see Document 195.
5. The subcommittee meeting on Monday, May 6, was devoted almost entirely to the response of the British representative, Commander Noble, to the Soviet proposals of April 30. Stassen remarked in part: “I intend to discuss the important Soviet proposals (DC/SC.1/55) of 30 April at an early date, but not today.” (Department of State, Disarmament Files; Lot 58 D 133, Subcommittee Meetings, London, 1957, DC/SC.l/PV.110) No record of a U.S. Delegation review on Tuesday, May 7, has been found in the Eisenhower Library or Department of State files.

6. In telegram 7854 to London, May 8, Dulles responded to Stassen’s suggestion as follows:

   “Reference your letter May 5, I feel your return at present would give rise to undesirable optimistic speculation. Also I feel that unless some preparatory work is done it would not be practical to get within a few days the new position needed for your purposes. I wonder whether under the circumstances it would not be better for you first of all to cable or mail in concrete terms the elements of the partial agreement which you think would be acceptable to us and have some chance of achievement. Then this could be studied here for a few days and after it has been studied then you could, if it still seems desirable, return in person.” (Department of State, Central Files, 330.13/5–857)

7. No record of Bowie’s debriefing has been found in Department of State files. Regarding the NAC Ministerial meetings in Bonn, May 2–4, see vol. IV, pp. 167–169.