Skip to content

Results:

51 - 60 of 121

Documents

July 31, 1974

Memorandum to the Secretary of State from ACDA Director Fred Ikle and Policy Planning Staff Director Winston Lord, 'Analytical Staff Meeting on Non-Proliferation Strategy'

To help Kissinger prepare for a follow-up discussion, ACDA and State Department officials prepared a "Non-Proliferation: Strategy and Action Programā€ to help guide policy. A key proposal was for ā€œhigh level political approaches to key exporting countries to enlist their support for safeguarding transfers of nuclear materials.ā€ While Washington had to approach a number of nuclear exporters, consultations with France ā€œconstitute the most crucial and urgent step to be taken.ā€

July 11, 1974

Executive Secretary George S. Springsteen to Secretary of State Kissinger, ā€œAnalytical Staff Meeting,ā€ enclosing ā€œDiscussion Paper on U.S. Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy"

This report provided a comprehensive take on the problem of nuclear proliferation and the state of U.S. nonproliferation policy. Among the specific issues reviewed were the status of the NPT, export control issues, the problem of ā€œpeaceful nuclear explosions,ā€ the implications of the Indian test, and long-term steps for controlling the proliferation of nuclear capabilities. Prepared by Jerome Kahan and Charles Van Doren, respectively with the State Departmentā€™s Policy Planning Staff and the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.

July 7, 1974

Memorandum of Conversation between James Callaghan et al: 'Energy; North Sea Oil; Foreign Assistance; Nuclear Non-Proliferation; CSCE; Trade Bill'

Near the end of a discussion with British Foreign Secretary James Callaghan, Kissinger realized he needed to tackle the problem of nuclear exports and asked his aide, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, to arrange a staff meeting.

June 24, 1974

Under Secretary Sisco's Principals' and Regionalsā€™ Staff Meeting

Encourages interest in a close look at nuclear export policy were negotiations, pre-dating the Indian test, over nuclear reactor sales to Israel, Egypt, and Iran. Chairing the meeting in Kissingerā€™s absence, Under Secretary of State Joseph Sisco expressed dismay that nuclear nonproliferation had lost high-level support during the Nixon administration.

June 18, 1974

Memorandum of Conversation, 'Indian Nuclear Explosion; World Food Conference; Pacific Coast Tankers; NATO Declaration; Middle East; Trade Bill'

Canadaā€™s safeguards had failed to prevent India from converting spent fuel from the CANDU reactor into plutonium. Kissinger acknowledged to Canadian Foreign Minister Mitchell Sharp that U.S. safeguards had also proven to be ā€œlousy,ā€ failing to prevent India from using U.S.-supplied heavy water for its nuclear activities. Sharp asked Kissinger how the proliferation of nuclear technology could be prevented and what should be said to the Argentines and the Egyptians, who were also seeking to use nuclear energy. But Kissinger evidently had no answer.

June 3, 1974

National Security Decision Memorandum 255, Henry Kissinger to Secretary of Defense et al., 'Security and Other Aspects of the Growth and Dissemination of Nuclear Power Industries'

This memo states that the President has read the report by the NSC Under Secretaries Committee and approved the recommended consultations with other countries. In the memo, Henry Kissinger endorsed consultations with suppliers to establish ā€œcommon principles regarding the supply of sensitive enrichment technology or equipmentā€ and encouraging multinational frameworks for ā€œenrichment, fuel fabrication, and reprocessing facilities,ā€ among other measures.

March 25, 1974

Report, National Security Council Under Secretariesā€™ Committee, 'Action Plan for Implementing NSDM 235'

An interagency NSC sub-committee was exploring the problem of safeguards for sensitive nuclear exports. The problem was that an existing group, the Zangger Committee based on NPT membership, did not have a broad enough membership or scope to manage the problem and that France did not belong to the Zanggger Committee.. Under Secretaries Committee proposed ā€œtalks with other suppliers of technology and equipment in the reprocessing and enrichment fields on desirable new constraints or guidelines that should be followed.ā€

July 1978

Interagency Intelligence Memorandum, US Director of Central Intelligence, 'South Africaā€™s Nuclear Options and Decisionmaking Structure'

Memo reports that during the period the Carter administration was putting pressure on South Africa to avoid the nuclear weapons route, but the analysts suggested that even if the South Africans signed the NPT and accepted IEAE safeguards they would continue to pursue a ā€œcovert program.ā€

December 1982

Central Intelligence Agency, Directorate of Intelligence, 'Indiaā€™s Nuclear Procurement Strategy: Implications for the United States'

This CIA report on India, ā€œIndiaā€™s Nuclear Procurement Strategy: Implications for the United States,ā€ has comparatively few excisions. It discusses in some detail Indian efforts to support its nuclear power and nuclear weapons development program by circumventing international controls through purchases of sensitive technology on ā€œgray markets.ā€ The report depicts a ā€œgrowing crisis in the Indian civil nuclear program,ā€ which combined with meeting nuclear weapons development goals, was forcing India to expand imports of nuclear-related supplies. The purchasing activities posed a ā€œdirect challenge to longstanding US efforts to work with other supplier nations ā€¦ for tighter export controls.ā€

October 21, 1983

Special National Intelligence Estimate, SNIE 93-83, 'Brazilā€™s Changing Nuclear Goals: Motives and Constraints'

Brazilian nationalism has often posed a challenge to US official precepts on the way the world should work and these estimates convey the deep Brasilia-Washington gap over nuclear policy during the 1980s. The SNIEs from 1983 and the 1985 update emphasize Brazilā€™s quest for technological-industrial autonomy which in nuclear terms meant developing an indigenous program to master the fuel cycle, including uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing capabilities. In seeking those objectives, Brazil did not want to face any constraints, and its leaders were unresponsive to U.S. or other pressures for safeguards on nuclear facilities.

Pagination