The memo deals with the reorganization of political control and of the "command chain" with respect to NATO's nuclear deterrent (opinions of the UK and France, Italian and German criticism).
There are 3 attachments: 1) Multilateral Nuclear Force. Italian stance with regards to British proposals (2 pages); 2) British position on Multilateral Force - Message from Washington on 4th December (5 pages); 3) Reorganization of the Atlantic nuclear deterrent (12 pages).

The document consists of the transcript of what has been told to the Italian Embassy in London (Cattani), November 20th about British remarks with regard to Atlantic Nuclear Force project. The document describes the features of the project, reports the disadvantages that could derive from the proposal and the British doubts about that. In addition, the document underlines the goals and the features that - from the Italian point of view - the MLF project could and should have.

This correspondence between the Ministry of Defense and embassies in Washington and London discusses the current state of NATO's (nuclear strategy) and the different views held by France, Great Britain, Germany and United States.

In view of the Ottawa meeting, Alessandrini analyzes the current situation of NATO's conventional forces, in accordance with the new drastic measures which were formulated - but not yet validated - by the Council. Alessandrini stresses that the problems related to armaments - both nuclear and conventional - can't be solved by "separated and independent" solutions.
Furthermore, the document deals with the risk that NATO could define interests of "priority defense" and of "minor defense", using an approach that could probably ignore - for example - the interests of Italy.

Alessandrini's report to PM Piccioni and Minister of Defense Andreotti discusses current questions of defense that will be brought up in the upcoming Ottawa session. According to him, NATO should focus on its internal organization and in particular, developing a common nuclear force, despite the technical and political challenges of such project.

Italy's permanent representative to NATO Alessandrini writes to PM Andreotti in preparation for the upcoming Paris summit. He shares general remarks about the state of the alliance and current issues in international relations focusing on the German question, Cuba, and Sino-Soviet relations.

Discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of accepting the terms of nuclear warfare proposed at a NATO meeting in Athens. Whether or not to respond to a Soviet nuclear attack with an atomic weapon of equal strength was debated at the meeting, as well as the role that conventional weapons would play in such a conflict.

A report on the discussions which occurred at a meeting of the Atlantic Council, during which the relative military powers of the Soviet Block and Western Block were compared. The different positions and threats posed to various NATO nations were also discussed. Finally, the report laid out plans for nuclear, submarine, and aerial weapons development to ensure that the Soviet Block’s military power never exceeds that of the Western block.

The document presents the argument that nuclear weapons can and should be employed even in cases where they are not absolutely necessary because the cost of developing and maintaining conventional weapons is too high. Therefore, NATO should consider raising its ‘nuclear threshold’ to allow more atomic weapons to be developed in Europe and in the United States.

In the use of nuclear weapons for a purpose other than response to an attack, NATO members must reach a majority agreement rather than a unanimous vote. Furthermore, this majority vote must include the United States.