Report by italian representative to the Atlantic Council A. Alessandrini to Deputy Prime Minister. The report assesses that the NATO MLF represents the only real chance for European countries to actively contribute to the elaboration of a Western political-military strategy. the MLF is also seen as potentially laying the foundations of european nuclear capability; for this reason a european provision is considered of paramount importance.

Reminder by adm. A. Zamboni on organization and structure of NATO Multilateral Force, including its political, strategic, economic and legal features. Particularly prominent is the European Provision as discussed in several different fora.

Letter from ambassador R. Ducci on the need to establish a European Federation with autonomous nuclear capabily.

The note describes the story of the project to establish a multilateral nuclear force within NATO, from the origins up to the current situation.

Although the MLF topic isn't on the Atlantic Council's agenda, it will be nevertheless one of the topics discussed during the bilateral conversations. The document reports the current situation, Italy's position, the Italian diplomatic action and the viewpoint of other main Allies.
There are also 4 attachments (the European clause; an hypothetical MLF base in Italy; the timing of the project; a possible Italian financial commitment).

As discussion of a NATO multilateral force (MLF) unfolded, unfolded, one question which had to be addressed was how the Soviet Union would respond to the creation of such a NATO force. Because a NATO force would increase Western military capabilities, Soviet opposition was assumed.

Memorandum presented at 11 October 1963 meeting of the Dutch Council of Ministers. The memorandum is highly critical of the military merits of the proposed NATO Multilateral Nuclear Force, and argues that even if the MLF is created, the Netherlands should decline to participate.

Paper presented at 4 October 1963 meeting of the Dutch Council of Ministers. The paper lays out the reasons for declining to participate in the Multilateral Force so far, but argues that due to changes in the situation – principally a turn on the part of the British toward participation – the Netherlands now should move to participate in the talks. The paper lists the (political) advantages of such participation.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Luns reports that the Secretary of State Rusk has asked him to explain the American position regarding the Multilateral Force (MLF) to Prime Minister Khrushchev on his impending visit to Russia. The main point is that the MLF is not intended to give Germany control over nuclear weapons.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Luns reports on a discussion he had with Jean Monnet on the EEC and the Multilateral Force (MLF), including topics such as the interconnection between these issues, the risk of a German nuclear force, and transatlantic relations in general. Luns also met with Undersecretary of State Ball, who was keen on moving ahead with the MLF and proposed holding a conference about it in The Hague, which Luns had to decline. Luns furthermore met with Minister of Foreign Affairs Couve de Murville, who put the blame with the Americans for inciting thoughts about nuclear independence on the part of the Germans. Minister of Defense De Jong responds by giving a broad military-strategic analysis, concluding that unity within NATO is essential to prevent American attention from shifting increasingly to Asia.