0 CONFIDENTIAL IAC - 26 October 2 1950 INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERCY ACENCY CONFERENCE History of IAEA Negotiations Attached is a draft account of the development of IAEA negotiations up to the Working Level Meeting of February 27 1956 which may be useful as background informtion in connection with the Conference on the IAEA Statute The developments of the Working Level Meeting have already been covered by other documents Any corrections or suggested improvements would be welcomed and may be sent to Mrs Puckett in R C Breithu t Ext 2957 State-FD CONFIDENTIAL 13235 A M33939 93 51 - uoL DECLASSIFIED W II CONHDENTIAL 9 HISTORY OF IAEA NECOTIATIONS Page The President's Proposal of December 8 1953 Bilateral Negotiations with the Soviet Union Multilateral Negotiations on the IAEA draft statute DECLASSIFIED I $ 33 CONFIDENTIAL yr HISTORY 77 I THE PROPOSAL 01 8 1953 President Eisenhower's address entitled Atomic Power for Peace delivered before the United Nations General Assembly on December 8 1953 was the genesis of the International Atomic Energy Agency fter dwell- ing upon the fearful potentials of the danger threatening thetaorld as a result of the discovery and development of atomic energy for Lili- tary uses the President pointed out that the United States no longer possessed a monOpoly of atomic power knowledge concerning which would eventually be widely shared In this connection the Fnited States would not accept as final the application of this power for purposes of mass destruction only The United States he said wished to 1e constructive --not destructive To substantiate this assertion he cited the record of American efforts on behalf of world peace and security The President then stated that there was a new avenue of peace suggested by the United Nations Ceneral Assembly Resolution of Yovember 18 1953 recommending the establishment of a Disarmament Commission subcom- mittee consisting of the powers principally involved which in private should seek an acceptable solution of the world's disarmament problems The United States was instantly prepared to participate in this effort and to carry into private talks a new conception Thus the United States would seek more than the mere reduction or elimination of atomic materials for military purposes it would strive to make possible the rapid development of peaceful uses of atomic energy for the benefit of all mankind and to hasten the day when fear of the atom world begin to disappear from the minds of people and the governments of Fast and West To this end he wished to make the following proposal as a pathway out of fear and into peace First the Governments principally involved should begin to make joint contributions from their stockpiles of normal uranium and fission- able materials to an International Atomic Energy Agency to be established under the aegis of the Lnited Nations Of those principally involved the Soviet Union would have to be one Details concerned with these con- tributions should be worked out in private negotiations Secondly the proposed International Atomic Thergy Agency IQFA would be responsible for the impounding storace and protection of the contributed fissionable and other materials in a bank which the President was confident scientific ingenuity would be able to protect against surprise seizure Thirdly a more important responsibility of the gency would be to devise methods of allocating these materials to serve the peaceful pursuits of mankind especially that of providing abundant electrical enercy in power-starved areas of the world DECLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL mam 3 CONFIDEN ML j DECLASSIFIED lXuthorhy 2 Although the President anticipated that initial contributions to the Agency would be small in quantity he said the pr0posal had the great Virtue that it could be undertaken without the irritations and mutual suspicions incident to any attempt to set up a completely acceptable system of world-wide inspection and control The President then enumerated four objectives that the Agency should seek to serve if it were to have United States support 1 To encourage world-wide investigation into the most effective peacetime uses of fissionable material and to assure the availability of material needed for conducting all appropriate experiments 2 To bepin to diminish the potential destructive power of the world's atomic stockpiles 3 To demonstrate to the peoples of the world that the nreat Powers both of the East and west are more interested in human aspirations than in building up armaments of war To open up a new channel of peaceful discussion and initiate a new approach to the nany difficult international problems that must be solved if the world is to make positive prosress toward peace In conclusion the President dedicated the United States to devote its entire heart and mind to find the way by which the miraculous inven- tiveness of man shall not be dedicated to his death but consecrated to his life At the time it was made the President's proposal served several purposes As a bold imaginative appeal to world opinion it helped to counteract the considerable success achieved by the Soviet Union's prOpa- ganda campaign to ban nuclear weapons ihus it was hailed with genuine world-wide enthusiasm and generated for the United States an unusual degree of international goodwill It reflected a genuine humanitarian desire of the American people to contribute to the welfare of the peoples of the world by developing the peaceful uses of atomic energy throuvh international cooperation In the face of a continuing deadlock over the control of atomic eneray for military purposes it offered a possible means of reducing nuclear materials available for weapons by siphonina them off into ah international pool The President did not explicitly refer to the problem of safeguards A basic theme of his address however was the diversion of nuclear materials away from military to peaceful uses The need for safeguards therefore to prevent the reversal of this flow was at least implicit mm 3 ML 9 DE CLASSIFIED 3 Aumo wd zg ajgl_ II IILATIRAL NICOTIATIOHS WITH THE SUVIET UNION ON IAEA In following up the President's speech Secretary Dulles conferred with the Soviet Ambassador in Washington on January ll 195b and handed him an aide memoire containinc a suggested approach for the discussion of atomic enersy problems including the proposed In the note the United States proposed that conversations should be initially con- ducted through diplomatic channels but with any participant reserving the right to propose shifting the deliberations to the Inited Nations pursuant to the UN Resolution of November 1953 referred to in the President's speech Initially the U s believed that procedural talks should be limited to the USSR and the United States with participation of the other nations principally involved to be determined in the light of the subject matter to be discussed The United States expressed its willingness to consider any proposal that the Soviet Union wished to make with reference to nuclear weapons but believed that the first effort should be on a modest basis The United States therefore urged an early private discussion of the President's IAEA proposal of Iecember 8 1953 The Soviet r overnment responded on January 19 195b in a note delivered by the Soviet Ambassador to Secretary Tulles Commenting on the statement that the Lnited States was willing to consider Soviet pro- posals regarding nuclear weapons the Soviet r overnment stated that it was proceeding on the assumption that during the course of the negotiations consideration would be given to the proposal of the Soviet Union for an international a reement containin' an unconditional obligation not to make use of nuclear weapons At an appropriate stage the Soviet Government believed consideration should be niven to includinc in the negotiations all Powers bearing the chief responsibility for maintaining peace and international security Furthermore the Soviet Government conditioned its agreement to enter into It nenotiations on American acceptance of the principle of rotation 1y which one meetinr would be devoted to considering the IAYA and the next meeting to consideration of the ban on nuclear weapons Secretary Lulles and Foreivn Ninister holotov took advantage of the rerlin Conference in January and February l95h for further atomic energy discussions On January 30 Ir holotov handed Secretary Dulles the draft of a declaration in which the Soviet Union suggested that the Governments of the United States United Kingdom Trance the Chinese Peoples depublic and the Soviet Union issue agreeing to the unconditional renun- ciation of the use of nuclear weapons In the course of this meeting hr iolotov stated that he considered that the five Powers named in the declaration should be the ones invited to participate in subsequent negotiations on atomic problems in view of their primary responsibility for the maintenance of peace and international security In the course of further ex hanges Canada and Belgium were suggested by the Ynited States and Czechoslovakia by the Soviet Union as possible participants CONFIDEN I mL 6 CONFIDEN 4 9 DECLASSIFIED Authority Al statednt aiegter to Mr Molotov of February 16 l95b Secretary Dulles nepoii t h d not actually proposed that Canada and Telriun join the a lofs as 1mpOrtant source material producers but that at such time is talks miaht shift from a bilateral to a multilateral basis considera- uion should be given to the problem of what countries should participate rthermore he wished to reiterate a statement he had made repeatedly in nerlin that the United States was not prepared to participate in any C9316rence with the Chinese Communist regime on the theory that it had or S aer any special responsitility for the maintenance of peace and inter- national security On narch 10 l95h the Soviet Government replied to Secretary Dulles' letter in a memorandum given to Acting Secretary Bedell Smith by the Soviet Ambassador in Vashington he Soviet memorandum noted that the United States Covernnent did not consider it expedient at present to define which countries should be invited to participate in subsequent atomic energy talks The Soviet Government however expressed its willingness to con- tinue to discuss atomic problems on a bilateral basis and to resume the question of future participants at such time as it was decided to expand the nevotiations The memorandum concluded with a statement that the Soviet Government continued to favor the participation of the Chinese Peoples Republic in any expanded nepotiations On Karch l9 195b Secretary Dulles gave the Soviet Ambassador in Vashineton a memorandum outlining in some detail the type of an inter national atomic energy asency envisaged by the United States Its objec tives would be 13 to encourage into the development of peaceful uses of atomic energy by assuring that the engineers and scientists of the world had sufficient materials for conducting such activities and by fosterinr the exchance of information 2 to furnish nuclear materials to meet the needs of agriculture medicine and other peaceful activities includine the eventual production of power nctions of the Agency would be 1 the receipt and ale 2 the allocation of these materials and nformation and extension of technological The three broad fu storase of atomic materi 3 the fosterine of exchange of 1 services The facilities of the Agency would include installations for the receipt storage and issuance of nuclear materials control laloratories for analysis and verification of receipts and inventory control of nuclear materials and those other facilities as might eventually be necessary for such purposes as education and training research and development and fuel fabrication and chemical processing Regarding the relationship of the Agency to the United Nations and other international bodies it was proposed that the Agency should submit reports to the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations neneral Assembly when requested by either of these organs The Agency should also consult and cooperate with other Fnited Nations bodies the work of which was reiited to that of the Agency ONHDEN t3 counoennu 9 -5- In Geneva on April 27 l95b Ur Nolotov handed Secretary Dulles an aide mem01re supposedly replying to the United States Government's ucmorandum of March 19 outlining details of the proposed IAFA The Soviet Memorandum however for the most part ignored the outline and was devoted primarily to reiterating the Soviet demand fer an international agreement bannins the use of atomic weapons 0n the alleged assumption that the rresident's IAEA proposal was primarily a disarmament measure the Soviets first declared that the comparatively small amounts of atomic materials that States might allocate to the IAEA from their stocks would not in fact diminish the amount of atomic materials being devoted to the produc tion of nuclear weapons By creating the impression that it was fulfilling this function the proposal might lead the world to ignore the more press- ing problem of prohibiting the use of nuclear weapons In addition he Soviets asserted that producing electricity from atomic energy on an industrial scale also produced increased amounts of weapon materials as a by-product Thus by fostering the peaceful uses of atomic energy the amount of fissionable materials would actually be in- creased without any limitations As a second argument the Soviets claimed that the President's pro- posal completely evaded the problem of the inadmissibility of the use of nuclear weapons and hence justified their conclusion that the proposal failed to meet its basic purpose--elimination of the threat of atomic war The Soviet Memorandum concluded with an ardent avowal of Soviet devotion to the cause of the peaceful uses of atomic ener y coupled with a declaration however that it was necessary fOr overnments first to accept the Soviet proposal for repudiatin the use of atomic weapons before pursuing negotiations on peaceful uses The United States overnment containeC its rebuttal in an informal memorandum hr Dulles save to Hr Lolotov on Ray 1 195b in neneva and in a more formal memorandum of July 9 l95b handed to the Soviet Ambas- sador in ashinnton The tnited States pointed out that the IASA proposal was not intended as a measure for the control of atomic weapons nor as a solution for the problems mentioned in the Soviet memorandum Rather its purpose was a more limited one of initiating international cooperation in one area of the atomic energy field peaceful uses and on a basis which would avoid many of the obstacles which had blocked arreement in the past In this way the proposal could produce an improved international atmosphere in which the more difficult problems of atomic disarmament would be more susceptible to solution Concerning the Soviet assumption that any form of peaceful utilization of atomic enerry would necessarily increase stocks of weapon materials the United States pointed out that ways could be devised to safeguard against diversion of materials from power reactors and that there were cases of peaceful utilization in which no question of weapon crade material A l y 360NFIDENIIAL 3 - 6 - Authoritym cons Slng the United States felt that States with knowledge regarding the uruc 1V8 uses of atomic energy had an obligation to make such knowledge available for promoting the welfare of peoples generally the United States conSidered itself free to go ahead with plans for an agency with other interested nations without Soviet participation which however would always be welcome Referring to the Soviet demand for an unconditional ban on the use of atomic weapons the United States stated that a mere paper promise not to use such weapons would not only fail to reduce the chances of war but tend to increase them on the grounds an aggressor might be tempted to initiate an attack in the hope that the ban would prevent or delay the use of nuclear weapons in the defense of the victim The Soviet Government delayed its reply until September 22 l95h when Ambassador Pohlen was given an aide memoire by hr romyko in Moscow In the aide memoire the Soviet overnment reiterated its arguments in favor of an international agreement banning the use of nuclear weapons and implied that if the Soviet Union agreed to accept the Fnited States position it would in fact be tantamount to approval of the continued production of atomic weapons The Soviet overnment however referred to the Vnited Ftates overn- ment's statement that ways could be found to guarantee against the diversion of fissionable materials from peaceful to military uses and stated it was prepared to examine the American views on this ouestion The Soviets also stressed the importance of attempting to reconcile the conflicting positions of the bnited States and the Soviet Union with reference to questions of the military and peaceful utilization of atomic energy and expressed their willingness to consider these ouestions in an effort to arrive at an appropriate agreement For the first time the Soviets then outlined certain points they considered should not be overlooked in considering the IAEA With refer- ence to the structure and governing bodies of such an agency the Soviet Cevernment stated an important principle was that there should be no privileged position for any one State or group of States which would permit them to enforce their will on other States Secondly an agency with sufficiently wide authority to be effective should not at the same time exercise its powers to the detriment to the security of any of its members Thirdly the Soviet Povernment agreed with the Lnited States that such an agency should report on its activities to the Security Council and the General Assembly of the United Nations and that any questions having to do with the security of Member States should be considered by the Security Council in connection with its responsibilities for maintaining peace and international security In conclusion the Soviet Government reiterated its willingness to continue negotiations to examine proposals of both the Soviet and the United States Governments and suggested that the exchange of notes which had taken place umnm frAnfde public '33 - 7 Ambasggiodn%te States agreed to this suegestion in a letter fror Secretaveruiilen to Mr Cromyko of September 23 195h 0n the same day t 3 es also announced the merican consent to publication of ne Cd8n'e of notes in an address to the United Nations r veneral Assembly In t ls talk he stated that the plan for the IAEA which the United States hag submitted for Russian consideration could not hurt anyone nor were its initial provisions of such a nature as to affect the military capability of the Soviet Lnion Hence there was no apparent reason for its rjectiono It had the merit above all of being a practicable easily workable plan not depending upon an elaborate surveillance Yevertheless the Soviet novernment had refused to participate in the implementation of the Presi dent's proposal except on the condition of an international agreement to renounce a use of atomic energy which provided the free nations with their strongest defense against aggression The Secretary stated that in its last note of September 22 1994 the Soviet Union after five months of silence had affirmed its willineness to talk further but gave no indica- tion that it had receded from its negative position Although the United States remained ready to negotiate with the Soviet Union it was unwilling to suspend its efforts to establish an IAUA in close partnership with other interested countries In this connection the Secretary stated that the United States would propose an agenda item for the eneral Assembly which would enable the United States to report on the efforts it planned to make in fostering the peaceful uses of atomic energy including the creation of an IAEA 2 the conveninq of an international scientific conference on peaceful uses urder the auspices of the United lations 3 the opening in the United States of a reactor training school for foreien students in peace- ful uses and an invitation to a substantial number of medical and surgical experts from abroad to participate in the work of American cancer hospitals usinr atomic energy techniques in the course of the United Vations debate on disarmament in September and October 195b the Soviet Fnion indicated that it had modified its insistence that a ban on the use of nuclear weapons would also have to precede neeotiations concerning an international weapons control system The United States in its reply of ovember 3 195b to the Soviet aide memoire of September 22 referred to this apparent shift of policy and stated it assumed that the Soviet Union had also modified its earlier position that a ban on the use of nuclear weapons should be a condition precedent to agreement on international cooperation in the peaceful uses of the atom The United States reply again stressed the point that the President's proposal of December 8 1953 was not a disarmament plan but an expression of Pmerica's sincere desire for a new international climate in which the problems of disarmament might find a readier solution The United States Government believed that cooperative measures to push the peaceful uses of atomic enervy should parallel continuing disarmament negotiations The cause of humanity should not be prejudiced however by deferring the CONFIDEN 1 ML 8 Authority international development of atoms-for-peace until the difficult problems of disarmament were solved As a good starting point for the continuation of United States-Soviet negotiations in the peaceful uses field the United States suggested that a study be made by experts from the two countries 0f the problems of diversion of fissionable materials from atomic power installations to military uses With reference to the peaceful application of atomic energy not requiring weapons grade material the United States stated that Soviet participation at the International Conference on Peaceful Uses subse- quentLy held in Geneva would no doubt justify the belief of the United States that great benefits could be derived from this field The Soviet Government replied in an aide memoire dated November 29 l95h in which it reiterated the important principles which would have to be taken into account in considering the question of international coopera- tion in peaceful uses The Soviet Government claimed that one of these principles--that the IAEA should submit reports to the United Tations Secu- rity Council and the General Assembly--had been contradicted by the action of the United States in sponsoring a resolution in the United nations General Assembly that the IAEA should be a specialized agency not respon- sible to the General ssembly or in appropriate instances to the Secu- rity Council AccordingLy the Soviet Government requested that the United States eliminate this alleged contradiction in its position Although the Soviet Government again pressed for a solemn and uncon- ditional pledge not to use nuclear weapons and cited United States opposi- tion as the principal obstacle to the achievement of this so-called peace step it agreed that negotiations on international cooperation for peaceful uses should not be conditioned on prior acreement on such a pledge The Soviet Government claimed that it was necessary to draw the attention of the United States for the third time to the fact that the peaceful uses of atomic enerry were associated with the possi- bility of increasing the quantity of fissionable materials available for Xpandine thevworld's atomic weapon stocks In this connection however the Soviet Government stated that it would have no objection to a joint study of this problem as oririnally proposed by the United States and expressed belief that there would be no difficulty in reaching agreement as to the time and place fer a meeting of experts on this matter The United States replied on April it 1955 to the roviet aide memoire of hovember 29 l95h in a memorandum which first pointed out that althou the United States was willing to discuss the principles enumerated by t e Soviet Union as basic to the establishment of the min such willingness should not be regarded as American agreement with these principles The United States than referred to negotiations on an IPFA 1 statute which meanwhile had been initiated with seven other nation principally involved The Soviets were informed that when the draft was completed a copy would be made available to them upon request CONFIDENHAL 3 5 DECLASSIFIED - 9 - been Egio igor ngum Ether stated that the United States Government had United ati 990 the affirmative vote of the Soviet Union in the l9 b of Which thong Cfneril Assembly on the Atoms-for-Peace Resolution in view December 8 el glued utates deSired to renew the President's proposal of to make - t9 3 th t the powers Principally involved commence and continue l01n contributions to the proposed IAFA from their stockpiles of no ear materials thus creating an international pool for peaceful uses In that event the United States stated that the IATA should be responsible for the storage and Protection of the contributed materials In conclusion the United States noted Soviet agreement in principle to a study by experts of diversion problems and enclosed a proposed agenda for such a meeting which it was suerested could commence at any time after May 1 1955 in washington D C The agenda entitled Safeguarding Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy listed for discussion safeguarding tech- niques connected with possible IAEA assisted uses of atomic energy especially with reference to the design construction and operation of reactors allocation and preparation of critical materials and the process- ing of irradiated materials On July 18 1955 the State Department received a Soviet memorandum in reply to the United States note of April lb in which the Soviet Govern- ment claiming to be guided by the desire to guarantee utilization of atomic energy for peaceful purposes only stated that it was prepared to participate in IAEA newotiations and expressed its readiness to contribute 50 kilograms of fissionable materials to the I z as soon as agreement could be reached on its creation A few days earlier Premier Pulpanin had announced in Geneva during the Summit Leeting that the Soviet Union would be willing to contribute fissionable materials but did not specify the amount In commenting on the nature of the activities the memorandum seemed to indicate that the Soviets were advocating a clearine house rather than a poolinp function for the Thus the Soviet Government stated that the IPEA should render aid of a consultative character that fissionable materials and special equipment should be made available by supplying States directly to requesting States on the basis of agree- ments sponsored by the and with responsibility for the safekeeping and utilization of the fissionable materials received being borne by the requesting State that the IAEA should encourage the exchanre of technical and scientific information and be responsible for the tread dissemination of data at its disposal With reference to a conference of experts to study diversion problems the Soviet Union accepted the agenda proposed by the Lnited Ftates and sugeested that the meeting take place in Geneva immediately after the International Peaceful Uses Conference around the end of August 1955 In conclusion the memorandum stated that the Soviet Union was already rendering bilateral assistance to certain countries which were initiating CONFIDENTIAL CONHDENTML 4 I DECLASSIFIED Authority 10 - peaceful uses programs and that it was the intention of the Soviet Union to broaden the circl - - 0f States 113 8881st in this field I Halch it was willing to cooperate and The United States replied in a note dated July 29 1955 in which the united States took note of the willingness of the Soviet Government to participate in IAEA negotiations and enclosed a copy of the draft IATA Statute which had been negotiated by the United States and the seven other interested States The comments of the Soviet Covernment on the draft were reouested and hope expressed that the Soviet Union would be one of the States sponsoring the proposed agency On August 17 1955 the United States informed the Soviet Union of the intention of the eight negotiating States to circulate their draft IATA Statute on or shortly after August 22 to all Members of the United ations or its Specialized Agencies on Augusn 22 the State Department acting on behalf of these negotiating Governments distributed the draft Statute to diplomatic missions in Washington for comment The United States also informed the Soviet Union of its willingness to participate in a meeting of experts to study the diversion problem at the time and place proposed by the Soviet Union but suggested that experts from the United Kingdom and Canada be invited The United States expressed the view that the meeting should be preliminary in nature and limited to five days with a possibility of calling a second meeting if necessary at a later date In a further exchange of notes it was aereed that the United Kingdom Canada France and Czechoslovakia should participate in the meeting Between August 22 and 27 experts from these six countries met in neneva to consider safeguarding techniques for preventing the diversion of fissionable materials from peaceful to militarv uses Dr Rabi head of the Lnited States Televation at these talks stated in his report of ucust 27 to Secretary Dulles that at no point during the discussions was there any indication that the Soviet Ynion would not join the IAFA althou h no special enthusiasm was shown for the idea of an agency Similarly while the Soviets did not deny the possitility of effective inspection and control they showed no affirmative enthusiasm for it nr Rabi also thought there were indications that the Soviet Union might prefer an agency the functions of which would be restricted to policing bilateral agreements Although the Soviets never committed themselves in the matter a general impression was gained that they were now willing to admit the possible feasibility of a control system for safeguarding peaceful uses 0n 0 tober l 1955 before the opening of the tnited Nations Ceneral Assembly discussion on the peaceful uses item the Soviet Union delivered an aide memoire containing its comments on the draft Statute of August 22 1 55 These comments were of special interest as indicative of what appeared to be a radical change in Soviet thinking concerning the functions CONFIDFNTIM CONFIDENM - 11 - gengzn hup h Apparently in the period between its July 18 and October 1 whi i Sov1et overnment decided to support the idea of an apency wou take actual custody of fissionable materials and exercise controls against diversion The safeguard talks in Geneva may have been influential in effecting this change In its October 1 aide memoire the Soviet Government stated that it conSidered the draft Statute with certain amendments could be used as a basis for drawing up an IATA charter in connection with which the Soviet Government wished to make six points The IAEA should be established within the framework of the United jations and report upon its activities both to the Security Council and the General Assembly This was necessary it claimed in view of the existing close connection between the peaceful and military uses of atomic energy and of the fact that IAEA activity would be closely connected with the use of dangerous fissionable materials The IAEA charter therefore should provide for control over the use of fissionable materials contributed to the Agency in order to assure that such materials would be used for peaceful uses only Accordingly it was appropriate that a representative interna- tional organ such as the United Fations should ensure the proper observa- tion and control over the work of the IAEA 2 On the ground that there ShOle be no privileged position for any country or group of countries and that all countries should have equal access to IAFA assistance initial IAFA membership should not be denied any State even though not a member of the Fnited Tations or a Specialized at ency 3 It would be appropriate for the permanent members of the Security Council to be permanent members of the IAEA Foard of overnors and that India Indonesia Eeypt and Rumania serve on the First Ioard It was also considered desirable that the number of members on the poard of Governors should be increased In view of the necessity of broad control both over the expendi- ture of dangerous fissionaLle materials piven to the IAEA and over their use by States receivinw aid the IQEA should have an appropriate staff of inspectors for the investiration of atomic installations projected by the receiving States and also the verification of the use of fissionable and other materials received from the IAEA These functions should be carried out b the inspectorial apparatus of the anency Provision should also be made however to assure that such controls were accomplished with due Observation of sovereign rights and within the framework of an agreement between a given State and the ILTA 3 Financial decisions should be made both by the General Conference and the board of Governors as a result of three-fourths vote DECLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL Wm 3 CONFIDENTIAL '2 Aging 38 1323 -12- 6 The jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in disputes concerned with the interpretation or an 1' ication of th be voluntary rather than compulsor I nA charter should In the final paragraph of its note the Soviet Government proposed calling a meeting 0f experts to examine questions connected with the working out of an IAEA charter It was suggested that experts should attend from the United States and the seven other States working on IAEA Problems as well as from the USSR and Czechoslovakia The Soviet Union made this note public in the course of the discussions in the recent United nations General Assembly on the IAEA In order to prevent the SOVlet Union from taking the initiative in canine the proposed meeting the United States issued invitations on October 2i 1955 to the seven members of the orisinal IAEA negotiating group and to the Czecho- slovakia India and Brazil to attend a meeting at a working level for giving further consideration to the draft Statute With the Soviet accept- ance of this invitation and their participation at the Preparatory Meeting of the enlarged negotiating group in washington on Hovember 1h 1955 the United States-Soviet bilateral IAEA negotiations became merged with the multilateral negotiations on the draft Statute itself MULTIIATERAL NEGOTIATION 0F IAEA DRAFT STRTUTE In the summer of 195% when it became apparent that Soviet intransi gence was blocking negotiations for establishing the IAEA with Soviet participation the United States decided to go ahead without the Soviets if necessary The United States first contacted the British and Canadians with whom relationships had been closest on subgects of atomic energy By agreement with them France and the two chief producers of uranium Belgium and Union of South Africa were added to the Negotia- ting Group Subsequently Australia and Portugal were added to the Group in order to include all countries outside the Iron Curtain producing sub- stantial quantities of uranium A revision of the outline for an Agency statute previously furnished the Soviets in cur memorandum of March 19 l95h was submitted on an informal basis to the negotiating States for their comment This draft which emphasized the Agency acting more in a brokerage capacity than as an atomic pool was never published Prior to any extended consideration of the draft the situation was changed through consideration by the united Nations General Assembly of the peace- ful uses item introduced by the united States Secretary of State Dulles in his Opening statement to the General Assembly on September 23 1951 announced the intention of the United States to press for the creation of an IAEA which it was hoped would start its work as early as the following year The IAEA was discussed by the General Assembly in the course of the debate on the peaceful uses item In the resolution on this item which was unanimously passed the United States took note of the efforts of the Negotiating Group and ex- pressed the hope that the IAEA would be established without delay CONFIDENTIAL ML 5 - 13 - Patteggogovai r h l95h the fresident appointed Mr Morehead the United St tethe rank of Ambassador to implement the policy of Atomic EnergyaAgznioo lng tgward the establishment of an International as vital and of degp cgnigriezz y thihPreSldent the world Ambassado tt a 88 an 0 Peace Of De a erson 8 office was established in the State partment in close association with the Office of the Special Assistant to the Secretary on atomic energy matters which continued to have responSibility for the bilateral negotiations with the Soviet Union on the subject of the Agency Shortly after the appointment of Ambassador Patterson some con- sideration was given to enlarging the Negotiating Group to include Brazil and India on the grounds they had achieved a special status in atomic energy matters through their inclusion on the Advisory Committee of the Secretary General of the United Nations which was planning for the Geneva Conference In infonmal discussions within the Department it was recognized that the composition of the existing Negotiating Group raised serious prOblems in the united Nations There was no representative either of Latin America or of Asia or Africa aside from Australia and the Union of South Africa in the case of the latter two areas It was recognized that the decisions of the Group would receive much greater support among other prospective Agency members if the Group were so enlarged However a number of considerations militated against an enlargement of the Group including the feeling that even a group of eight countries was somewhat large for the type of drafting work that had to be done A basic was how to bring the IAEA into being as as possible and at the same time cope with the variety of complicated and troublesome details connected with drafting an Agency statute The approach adopted'by Ambassador Patterson was to evolve a statute embody- ing a broad constitutional framework and statement of general principles under which the IAEA once it was established could work out solutions of the more detailed problems that might otherwise delay the Agency's coming into being if dealt with in the Statute Among the problems which it was felt the IAEA itself might consider later were such ques- tions as the location of IAEA headquarters and the spelling out of functions which the IAEA might assume under its broad grant of authority Meanwhile the United States the United Kingdom and Canada constituted themselves as an informal drafting committee of the Negotia- ting Group Work first started on the basis of a British draft which like the earlier American draft looked to the IAEA more as a clearing- house for the exchange of information than as a depositary for and distributor of atomic energy materials As a result of extensive tri- partite negotiations a draft emerged which combined the possibility for both of these functions Although provision was made in broad terms for some inspection and control over assistance extended by the IAEA this activity was not specifically named as one of the declared func- tions of the proposed IAEA DECLASSIFIED Authors-MM 6 DECLASSIFIED 'lh' Authority This draft was made available to th other members of the Negitiating Croup in March 1955 with a request for their views The nex several months were spent in revising the Statute to accommodate their suggestions to the extent possible The composition and selection of the Board of Governors was the issue which evoked the greatest amount of discussion among members of the NC80 laolng Croup at this stage Since it was clear that for a number of years the IAEA would secure its fissionable and source materials as well as other forms of assistance from a small number of states it was considered unrealistic to disregard this situation in developing a fermula for the Board A number of methods fer meeting the problem were considered One possibility was to provide a system of weighted voting dependent upon the size of contributions This approach was abandoned however upon the advice of experts to the effect that technical difficulties of evaluating contributions were too great Consideration was also given to naming certain countries with the most advanced atomic energy programs as permanent members of the Board which would have been Canada France United Kingdom and the United States This approach was considered undesirable for two reasons a period of years quite a number of additional states were likely to develop important atomic energy programs and secondly the possibility existed that a state designated as a permanent member would fail to make a substantial contribution to the Agency Furthermore all eight members of the Negotiating roup wished to be named as permanent members which was 0 large a number especially if countries like the U S S R and India should join the Over The formula eventually incorporated into the draft Statute of August 22 1955 was a compromise which attempted to conbinc aiflexible and functional approach with due representation for the interests of both contributing and recipient members With reference to the general question of IAEA management the eight members of the Negotiating Group were in agreement that the Board and not the a whole represented in the General Conference should exercise the final operating authority in the IAEA The Board was therefore given broad authority for making binding managerial decisions On the other hand the membership as a whole would maintain its general control over the Board through election of a number of its members and through the power of the purse requiring the budget to be approved by a two thirds vote of the General Conference The intent of this provision was to be further clarified in subsequent drafts On August 22 1955 the Negotiating States made the draft statute they had been working on available for comment to the then 84 merbers of the United Nations or its Specialized agencies The Debartment of State on behalf of the negotiators made the actual distribution throu the Embassies in Washington As previously mentioned a cosy of the draft Statute was given to the Soviets on July 29 1cg5 The United States kent the other members of the Hegotiatinp Group fully informed of its bilateral exchanges on the IALA vith theOSoviets CONFIDENTML 0 -15- It was originally hoped that the Groun would be able to the regueated comments vith a view tovard ircoroorating into the Statute as much of them as possible Countries interested in membership would then be requested to accede to the Statute which provided that the lash should come into existence after eight countries three of which would have to be the United States the United Kingdom U S G R Sanada or France ratified the Statute embly discussion of the atoms-for- 1955 it became apparent that there dure on the grounds that it voice in the drafting of In In the course of the General Ass peace item in October and November vas considerable opposition to this nroce did not give prospective menbers a sufficien the Statute and the management of the once it was established an effort to meet this criticism the Uegotiating Group announced its intention to invite all prOSpective menbers to participate in an international conference on the final text of the Statute It was at this time that the United States took the initiative to invite the Governments of Brazil UzecholeVahia India and the U S S 1 to join the Negotiating Group at a Lorking Level Meeting to consider the draft Statute Resolution on Peaceful Uses of Atomic adopted on Decenber 3 1955 velcomed ernments sponsoring the IAEL to call the expansion of the Negotiating The U R General Assembly Energy which was unanimously the announced intention of the 60' an international conference as well as Group to include Brazil Czec oslovakia India and the In addition the resolution noted with satisfaction that substantial progress was being made toward the negotiation of a draft Statute establishing the IAEA and recommended that the overnments concerned should take into account he views expressed on the IAEA during the General Assembly session as well as the c0Lments transmitted directly by Governments and that all uossible measures be taken to establish the ILEA without delay The resolution also requested that the Secre- tary General of the United Iations in consultation with his Advisory Committee study the question of the relationship of the IAEL to the United ctions and to transmit the results of the study to the sponsoring Governments before the international conference Finally the resolution reguested that these Governments report to the General Assembly as annronriate and suggested that the when established should con sider the desirability of arranging for an international periodical devoted to the peaceful uses of atomic energy The latter was origi- nally a Soviet suggestion 3n Yovember 14 1955 a meeting of the newly exuanded Legotiating Group was held in the Department of State in preparation for the Working Level Leeting Only procedural matters were discussed on this occasion at which on January 23 1956 was set the onening date for the Working Level heating to be held in Washington D A reement was also reached on provisional rules of orocedure and on a in nest awmroach for the discussions It was decided that the Leetinggdoulg DECLASSHHED CON FI DFN Authority M -16- Authority Al fggiigfgasregoifd change inv VinE atters 0 SUhStance or new related lgruhlcg to Y'hich the m onosal to furnish I a 8 aft statute The United States also romised memoers 0 the Jroun 31th conies of notes containing comnents of interested Governments on the draft Statute by December 15 resi Sf Lovember 30 1955 Ambassador'torehead Patterson submitted his uuobuon as bnited States Renresentative for International Atomic Lnergy Agency Yegotiations To oreoare a United States position for the Jorking Level heating a 301nt working group was formed comrosed of representatives of the Deoartment of Defense the Atomic Energy commission and the De artment of State Upon exarination of the oroblems involved agreement was reached in principle among the members of this group that the control and inspection functions of the IAEA to assure against diversion of materials from peaceful to military uses should be more clearly defined and expanded In close cooreration with the Ltomic Energy Commission an adninistrative system of safeguards was fortulated for incoraoration into the draft Statute This system contained the minimum measures con- sidered necessary to permit the United States to surrort the IAEA with fissionable materials and other forms of assistance eanvhile at the suggestion of India the Fegotiating Group agreed to postpone the convening of he Lorking Level heating until February 23 1956 in order to allow more time for adecrate nreaaration The joint working group profitably employed this neriod carefully to scrutinize the August 22 draft in the light of the COwDentS received from other Governments and its own recozmendations for strengthening the authority and increasing the usefulness of the I EA These prepara tions were facilitated by the annointrent on January 26 1956 of Ambassador James adsworth Debut United States Renresentative at the United Hations to serVe also as the Urited States RepresentatiVe for At01ic Energy Agency Negotiations After extensive consultations tith renresentatives of the British and Canadian Embassies a revised United States staff level draft of the Statute dated February 1956 was nroduced which contained the changes the United States hoped to see adopted at the Working Level eeting including the recommended minimum safeguard nrovisions This draft was made available to the other members of the Negotiating Group as a guide to nossible United States to be made at thelleeting but not as a substitution for the draft Statute of August 22 1955 the basic conference working document The Working Level heating convened as scheduled on February 23 1956 in the State Deoartment Conference Suite at 1776 Avenue thus onening a significant new nhase in IAEA negotiations CONFIDENTH-                     National Security Archive    Suite 701  Gelman Library  The George Washington University    2130 H Street  NW  Washington  D C  20037    Phone  202 994‐7000  Fax  202 994‐7005  nsarchiv@gwu edu