DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

N O R T H A T L A N T I C T R E A T Y O RG A N I T A T I O N O R G A N I S A T I O N DU T R A I T É DE L ’A T L A N T I Q U E N O R D

NATO CONFIDENTIAL

BUREAU DU REPRÉSENTANT DU GROUPE PERMANENT

i l P

V , — >- I - Li LJ : t 1 ij (.* IjiPALAIS DE CHAILLOT

PARIS (XVI')

OFFICE OF THE STANDING GROUP REPRESENTATIVE

[jM S Control N ° ......

LOM 2/60 9 Januaiy I960

MEMORANDUM FOR : Secretary, Standing Group

SUBJECT : Analysis of Discussions at December Ministerial meeting Reference : LOSTAN 3144

1. Attached are three copies of the draft report referred to in above reference.

2. They have been informally amended in accordance with latest position.FOR THE STANDING GROUP REPRESENTATIVE

R.F.Rudell Colonel USAF

S ^ u r H - Z Û

Enclosures : Three copies of DVB/200, dated 8 January I960

'■X'

2nd Draft NATO CONFIDENTIAL8th January i960

IMPLEMENTATION OF RESOLUTION ON DEFENCE (1959)

SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS CONCERNING -DEFENCE QUESTIONS MADK DUHIImG THIS MINISTERIAL PUTTING OF DECEMBER 1959

Note b,y the Secretary General and. Chairman of the Council

In accordance with paragraph 7 of the Resolution on Defence (1959)5 0-1(59)124, the Council at Ministerial level invited the Permanent Council to examine th-n various proposals put forward by Ministers during the course of the meeting with a view to increasing the effectiveness of NATO defence.

In order to assist the Council in its task I have had prepared the document at annex which classifies and summarises the various proposals put forward in the defence field during the Ministerial meeting. The Annex, which is prefaced by an index, is divided into three parts;I Organisation of .Defence; II Defence Production? Ill Infrastructure.Each part in turn comprises a series of subject heading?containing a brief resume of the principal points made by Ministers during the dis­cussion, together with references to the relevant passages in the verbatim record end suggestions regarding the action the Council might wish to take on each individual proposal. The classification into subject headings is necessarily somewhat arbitrary and it is not possible to avoid some degree of overlapping. In some cases tho liijj~iuuTtïVnisSr- äKrSi f-h'ivs groupé to­gether a series of proposals which« althoughaot-oanfined ta 1. point, are in fact closely interrelated. *■<.

The Council vail also be aware that a number of the points raised during the meeting were not new and have been the subject of action or consideration at one or another since the Heads of Governmentmeeting in December 195? by the Council or one of the Council:s committees. In cases where it appears useful I propose to issue separately a summary of the position reached on the various subjects in question, to serve as background documents for the Council or for whatover body it may designate to pursue the study of the various proposals summarised in the Annex.

Among other matters on which the Council should take a decision at an early date is the question of which of the various points dealt with in the Annex should be submitted to the meeting of 1'efence Ministers which,; in accordance with paragraph 8 of the Resolution on Defence, may be held r r n ^ T P ) 29 para.- 6.

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE -2- JSATO COi^’IDi;N?lAL

in Lîarch. An early décision on the exact datea o.U this mooting will alco be necesajii'y.

•» u * * Ä Æ S t -ff; 2 * th* W « « * « m A S Z * * ■MinlaUro' im itta j L *** *<“ V W * M u a

S S t O T Î Â - *" Ä Ä S Ä u “ Ä U £ £ “ ^

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

•SUMMARY OP PROPOSALS MADE BY MI BISTERS K j^UIRITtG FURTHER ACTION ^List of Subject Headings

I. ORGAÎIISAT I ON OF DEFENCE1. Air Defence2. Introduction of Nuclear VWeapons•> Organisation and sharing of defencek. NATO Defence Planningc;» Baltic Command6* Psychological Warfare7, Future of Annual Review

II. DSFE-iCE PRODUCTIONO Common Production of a Medium

Ballistic MissileCo-operation in the Fields of Production* Research.« and Testing Facilities

II I. I NFRA ST RUCT URE

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

1. AIR DEFENCE

Following an exoos-é of the problem by SACääUR, a number of Ministers renewed the support of their governments for the unification of the Air Pefence system in tho European theatre as proposed in MC 5 /2.« ïfcs French Minister of Defence expressed the strong desi.ro of his government co-operate in taking all the necessary measures in the technical fields and considered that .In certain circuaistanees national responsibilities could be delegated« Hs expressed the hope that a .satisfactory formula could be found to reconcile military end political factors of the problem.

Refs0 ; HACJSUE « C~VR(59)48. pp« 32, y-j

PARTJCa. KAT O CONFIDENTIA L

FraK.ce -do™ p* 36Germany ' dcr-> pp<- 37, 38ü «K0 ■»do«» p* 39Netherlands -dc~ F- 39U„£o ~do^ pp. 40, 41Italy °do~ Po L2Canada -do--- pp.- 42, 43Aoi'v-ay. —dS" po 4? .

G er.. ~dcv= PP' 46 30

Action suggested.

That tho Counci.', should note that at its mooting a-*; Ministerial level on 16th December it agreed that;

(a) xhe French author it ion would. as soon as possible, send General Norotad. their- comments on the technical documents submitted by him to the otanding Group and the Military Committee; there will be discussion of these cojainents between the French Government and SACSUH;

(b) V.itfcin two months the Council * on the basis of a report by the military authorities on these discussions, would resume consideration of this question with a view to assessing; what might possibly prevent the establishmentof the technical elements of a unified Air Defence ccm-and«

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE PALT 1 î.'Aïü C Q O W i O n A L

2o IBTK O PU üTIO a 01< aUÜLiiAR •.VjJATCflä

The Council heard a statement by SAJBUE on the present situation with regard to the introduction of nuclear weapons into the MATO Shield Forcée. Amon;; tho handicaps to more rapid process mentioned by General y or 8 tad were the lack of c tor age sites and dolays in implementing agreements between the United States and certain member countries providing for the exchange of classified information» The provision ox storage sites was causing particular problems in Germany; it was already generally subject to dolays in implementing construction programmes.

The French Minister of Hofence reaffirmed his country*s agreement on the need to equip the Shield Forces with nuclear weapons as foreseen in tho strategic cozncept approved by tho Council« His Government did not find the proposed conditions for the storage of nuclear weapons on French territory acceptable«, They deplored the abscnce o? such agreements and desired a rapid solution to the problem whoso serious consequences they fully appreciated.

The Norwegian Foreign JJinistor recalled that the problem of stockpiling of nuoloar weapons had been brought up at too short notice to permit adequate preparation of a discussion, but he would welcome a Council discussion of the Norwegian Government's and military authorities'1 policies in this field«

The German IJinister of JJefence urged countries who were at presentunable; to accept the storage of nuclear weapons on their territories tore-examine their attitude, particularly in view of ehe difficulties which this created for public opinion in Germany.

The Socretaz’y General pointed out that, /hen bi-lateral discussion of such problems had failed to give results, it was desirable to bring them before the Council for discussion on a multilateral basis.

Rof s : 'JnCCUIt C-W:(5î?}48, p„26France C~Vîï(59)48, p„28Aorway C~YK(59)48ç pp. 475 48Gexmany U-VTt( 59)48, p« 15üec » Gen « C-VR(59)48, pp 0 43,44

Action . suggestedThat the Council should resume discussion of -this problem at an early date on the basis of mors complote and e::pl:i.oit statement;; •co

* Introductio2i of fleclear '-Veapons ( cor-timed}be submitted by the countrico concerned an the political difficulties which impede tho accoptance of nuclear weaycus on their territories.

2» That the U.3« authorities should eoncidor what action i» posaiolo to expedite the exchange of information in order to pexsrdt the early activation of Shield Force units with nuo^car capability.

3. That farther consideration should bo given to expediting the solution of infrastructure and land acquisition proöiei.na which aro delaying the implementation of approved plane for the introduction of nueïoar v/eapons in Allied Coranand Burop© (sea Par t III - Infraa truc turc) (>

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

n.Aïo c al

3* ORÇAFXSATlOl! AID AUARING OF To A OOKHQN Dj^FEUC?' S F F Q R T ^

•Several Ministers referred to the need for pursuing the closer co-ordination, and as appropriate, integration of SATO defence forces«, Technical developments tended to increase rather than lesson the interdependence of member countries in the military field,,

Reference was made to the need, particularly in the case of the smaller countries, for a more rational use of the resources available, within the concept of "balanced collective forces. The Netherlands Minister spoke of the requirement for another fundamental review of the way in which member- nations should contribute towards meeting collective force requirements,He proposed specifically that the Council should take up a study of the means of re-activating plans and policies for the integration of common defence, and to this end suggested the possibility of c.i tier setting up a smell group of highly qualified men, or extending the terms of reference of the Annual Review Committee,

The U«. 8* drew attention to the need, for each member country to assume its full share of the defence burden and expressed the belief that the European members of the Alliance could ana should undertake on increased share of the common defence effort« He also considered tiat sore RATO nations were now in a position to extend mutual aid to their partners to assist them in achieving the minimum KATO collective balanced, forces« He suggested that the scope of shared financing could be broadened to include much of the weapons field,,.

France expressed understanding of the T.T., 8,. viewpoint with regard to the distribution of the defence burden, and. thought that the came consideration might apply to changes in the ÎTATO organisation*

(‘0 This covers views expressed by Ministers on the problems of forces co-ordination and integration in general, balanced collective forces, the sharing of the defence burden, etc* Although those subjects have been treated separately in the past, they were so closely interrelated in the course of the Ministerial discussion that it seemed preferable to deal with them under this single heading*

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

U. 3, C~VR(59/C-VRI 59 1 7,C-VRI 59)^8,Ue K„ C-VRI[59)k5nGreece C-VRl[59)h5>Netherlands C-VRI 59)47,Belgium C~VR(159)148,Germany C-VRI159)>k7,Italy C-VRI 59 >1+5,France C-VRI 59 >U5,Turkey C-VRI59 JSACEUR C-VR(59JiU8,

pp«17,IßPPeU?5 ppel}.OsL'rl p. 16 P. 10 p„ 8 pp.11,12 pe 14Po 29 Po 41Po 1 6 'Pa 23

SUGGESTED ACTION.

That the.Councils

Noting that the interrelated proposals mad® by the various DefenceI-onisters include:

(a) Studying the way in which member nations contribute towards meeting the collective force requirements\

(b) Furthering the concept of balanced collective forces|

(c) Reactivating plan3 and policies for integration of defence efforts|

(d) SqUitable sharing of the common defence effort, including extension of mutual assistance and "Of common financing.

Bearing in mind the' prpcedurés whichSrejre^established folïôwirig- the Heads of âoverhmsiit mëetihg in ßecenfoer 1937. tb. atùdÿ He^meraijprôbïèiii of integration of' resources, including the field of balanced collective forcesj

Should invite the nations which have shown special interest to elaborate on their proposals during a special Council mooting called for this purpose and:

Should then determine the procedure to be adopted from the study of various pro­posals taking into account the suggestions cade during the Ministerial meeting*

PART I» RATO C OTÏ?I DENTIAL

Certain Ministers drew attention to the need for continually adapting the NATO forces structure to the changing elements of the Soviet military threat , as well as to the evolution of m odern weapons and techniques of warfare. The U.„ K„ Defence Minister in particular suggested that it might be desirable to lay greater emphasis on the first phase of NATO's preparations against aggression, if necessary at the expense of a somewhat lower emphasis on the second phase which would follow a major nuclear exchange*

That the Council should invite the U*K. Government to put forward more detailed proposals on the possible applications of the concept of greater concentration on the first phase of preparations against aggression, with a view to their study by the MATO military authorities in relation to MC 70 and MC 55/1 :

That the more general concept of adapting the NATO forces structure to the evolution of the Soviet military threat and modern weapon techniques should be pursued in the context of long term planning,

C-VR(59)47, pp. 10.12,13Netherlands U0 8.SACEUR

do, p* Ö do. p. 3 do. p*21

Suggested action

DECL

ASSIF

IED

- PUB

LICLY

DISC

LOSE

D - P

DN(2

015)

0004

- D

ECLA

SSIFI

E - M

ISE

EN LE

CTUR

E PU

BLIQ

UE

PAKT I NATO Cüi'lFIDAiTTlAL

'jo BAI.TIC CQjxÆcUJD

The German Minister of Defence drew attention to the need for an early solution of the problem of establishing a unified inter­service oomraaiid for the defence of the Baltic approaches.

Refo Germany C-Viî(59)47> P« 22

Action suggestedSACEUB is understood to be working actively on a solution of

this problem with the national authorities concerned. The Council might wish to not® this fact and invito the MATO military authorities to report as soon as possible on the results of their negotiations.

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE PART I, flATO Cüar l D ^ ï I A L

6 . foXCliOLOCIG/iL

i'iio Cern:an Minister of Be fence oypresaed j&e vier.- that it waa no longer suitable to treat the planning and Cagaiwgfcbof psychologies. warfare as a national responsibility. and that certain co~ox`dinaticn end co-operation ühoulä be achieved in this field* Ko accordingly proposed- that a perirmnent Psychological Warfare Co-ordination section should ho established within Ui'ifiHS which ?.ould bo authorised to call together working groups at regular intervals with repreosntativcs from all merrier nations«

Ref» CcrTi:f.ny =• C-»VK(59)47, p„ 2 1«

JEjajgflostefl factionïhat the Council should invite the federal German Coveriaiient to

3Ubinit for discussion by the Council further details of their proposal for establishing rîATO co-operation and co^ordination in psychological wax-fare8 It would be desirable that on indication should be given of the scope of tho peacetime and wartime responsibilities of the proposed laychological Warfare Organisation at ShAi-I;} bearing; in wind that Stl<Fi3 already possesses a psychological warfare section with a limited planning role in connection with battlefield operation.-,

PAgT_I IJATü CCMPI D. ,'iJ ï'IâL

îc FUTURE py ANIiUAL HüVIlü'-Y

Certain Ministers made rofercnoe to the question of the future of the Annual Review. Tirez-k were Generally agreed that the Review itself should be maintained, although there was room for improvement and simpli­fication in the procedure itself» The main problems however> v/as chat of making the review more effective in its impact on national defence efforts. The liorwegian Minister suggested that if there was a general desire to reform the review, the problem should be discussed at a further meeting of Defence f&nisters.,

Refso Germany C-V?i(59)4?s u<> 20 Italy C-Vi<(59)47, p. 29ilorway .0-71(59)405 p « 14

Suggested actionProposals for reform of the annual Review are already on the

Agenda of the Council, which is examining the best method of carrying cut a study of these proposals. It is suggested that the Council should endeavour to complete its consideration of the problem not later than March 1960o

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

p a i r r i l ïMÏÏO Ü'EORiLT

Several NATO nations having indicated their interest in establishing in NATO a multi-national project in the production of Medium Range Ballistic Missiles,, the United States î/ünisr.er confirmed that the matter was under intensive review* The necessary studies were being made as a matter of priority and vi'ould soon be completed. The United States would 1/ en hope to he .able to assist such a project through an appropriate NATO agency*

Ref : U„SB C-VH (.59)^7, p*k

Suggested Act i onThat the Council should invite the U, 8* authorities

to consider possible action to accelerate the completion of their studies in connexion with the common production in Europe of a Medium Range Ballistic fissile,.

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

PART II H A .0 SACHET

0O CO-OFiCRATIOU IrT TUlù FIIÔLDC OF 'PRODUCTION. RaS&ftRCHI AI-'D y.-lSTITTG FACILITIES'^

Several Ministers referred to the urgent need for pursuing and expanding co-operation in the fields of research and production, and in research and testing facilities.

The U08„ laid particular emphasis on the co-operative utilisation of national resources in the scientific and technical fields: the U,K0 expressed special interest in more extensive sharing of research and testing facilities.

The U»R„ Minister of Defence also suggested that a new and constructive attempt "be made to expand and "broaden the concept of the NATO family of weapons» with a view to achieving further practical results during i960.

The German Minister of Defence drew attention to the fact that all efforts aimed at getting standardised weapons and equipment for NATO forces will have little effect as long as it has not heen decided to lay down uniform military "basic requirements for the weapons, equipment and vehicles required for the military forces of IIÄTO ... He repeated his proposal to set up a military technical committee for basic military requirementss which would work under the .Military Committee;,

2.The Norwegian Minister of Defence suggested an extension

of co-operation from the design stage in the replacement of ships and naval equipment, as the design, development and establishment of production lines required a relatively greater effort in the smaller countries. He asked that the work already being undertaken in this direction within NATO should be expedited«

The Belgian Minister insisted on the importance of extending co-ordinated production, and thus permitting the smaller countries of the Alliance to obtain a social and economic benefit from their military expenditures through participation of their industries in common production programmes»

/The Turkish Minister considered that the ever increasing rapidity with which new types of armaments are being produced makes it necessary for the members of the Alliance to create some new means of coping with the rna^or problem of procurement and thought that the military authorities should be invited to study and report on this question to the Council in permanent sessionj?

u„s. C--VRi 59;147, Pc 4U. K, C-•VRI 59 147, PP. 11,13Germany C-•VR<59 >47, p. 7Norway C--VRI59 148, p. 14Belgium C--VRI59 '48, p«- !2/Turkey C--VRI159)48, p.i§7

Supines ted ActionThe Council has recently approved a document on NATO

co-operation in research, development and production of- military equipment (C-M(59)02) and will soon have before it a revised version of the Military Committee paper on the same subject (MC 82/2 Revised). Under the terms of this paper the Military Committee will be reviewing its supporting organisation in order to determine what adjustments, if any, are needed in the NATO military organisational machinery« The new procedure established by the Council is flexible and such as to permit examination of the several suggestions made by Ministers,,

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

3 #

It is therefore suggested that the Councils-(a) Invite the German, British /and Turkish/ delegations

to provide more detailed information on the suggestions made "by their ministers;

(h) On receipt of such information to charge the Armaments Committee to examine those proposals in accordance with the new procedure laid down in C-M(59)32 and to report hack to the Council as soon as possible«.

DECL

ASSI

FIED

- PUB

LICLY

DI

SCLO

SED

- PDN

(201

5)00

04

- DÉC

LASS

IFIÉ

- MISE

EN

LECT

URE

PUBL

IQUE

NATO SECRET

INFRASTRUCTUREThe German Minister of Defence mentioned the difficulties

encountered with NATO military construction in Germany due to the complication 'both of national procedures for land procurement and infrastructure, and of NATO procedures«, After stating that he would do his "best to simplify national procedures, Mr« Strauss suggested that NATO' procedure should also he simplified tooth as regards the revision of the infrastructure programme and as regards approval procedures^Note; Owing to the importance and urgency of the infrastructure problem in Germany, the Secretary General wrote to the German Permanent Representative in early January stressing the need for expediting the execution of NATO infrastructure projects in Germany toy a simplification of German procedures.He suggested àt the same time that the German delegation should make proposals regarding any useful actions which might toe considered on the NATO side to the same end«

SACSUR underlined that the availability of storage sites and delays in implementing construction programmes are factors of critical importance (see para; Introduction of Nuclear Weapons)* As regards infrastructure in Germany 3.ACEUR was studying this problem with the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany,

Refst Germany C~VR(59)h7* P»18 SACETJP. C-VH(59 )18 ; p. 23

Suggested ActionThat the Council should take note of the initiative

already taken toy the Secretary General ;i n regard to land acquisition and infrastructure p.roce. arcs in' Germany,.':

That the Council should invite the infrastructure Committee to follow the matter up as a matter of priority, to consider what further action is possible on the NATO side to assist in solving infrastructure problems in Germany> and to report back to the Council by 1st March»