G/PM files, lot 68 D 349
No. 322
The Chairman of the Science
Advisory Committee (Buckley) to the President
secret
Washington, December 20,
1951.
My Dear Mr. President: On the occasion
of a recent visit to this country, Sir Henry Tizard, Chairman
of the Defense Research Policy Committee of the United Kingdom,
informed me of representations to be made by Mr. Churchill on his
forthcoming visit, which I feel should be brought to your
attention.
There is an existing agreement with Great Britain and Canada
providing for the full exchange of technical information in
matters of defense research and development, with the exception
of atomic energy and a few other special subjects. The British
have been critical of the effectiveness of the present
implementation of this
[Page 707]
agreement at the operating level, and Mr. Churchill is expected
to urge a modification of current practices in the exchange of
technical information.
Sir Henry Tizard also
informed me that Mr. Churchill will ask for a closer relationship
between the United States and the United Kingdom and Canada in
the field of atomic energy.
Mr. Churchill’s
advisers may be expected to have well defined proposals. You may
wish to take steps to define the U.S. position in these matters
in anticipation of his arrival.
In transmitting this information to you, I take the opportunity
of expressing the views of the Science Advisory Committee on the
exchange of technical information with our allies which are
amplified in the attached memorandum. The Committee feels that
there is a great reservoir of technical resources, not only in
Great Britain and Canada, but also in the NATO nations, which is not, but
ought to be, fully utilized and is urgently needed for our own
national security and for the defense of Europe. In any joint
undertaking such as NATO,
common effort and the cooperation of all groups is an essential
to success, but basic to cooperation is free interchange of
information. This is especially true in scientific research and
development. Our allies need our help, but equally we need
theirs.
The Committee believes that steps should be taken to explore the
practical limitations that now are being applied to exchange of
technical information with Great Britain and Canada and to seek
means for better implementation of existing policies. We feel,
however, that before concluding any definite changes in the
arrangements with the United Kingdom and Canada there is need at
least to consider the nature of possible arrangements with the
other NATO countries.
In view of the short time which may elapse before these questions
come up, my suggestion is that an ad hoc
committee, consisting of a representative from the Department of
Defense, a representative from the Atomic Energy Commission, a
representative from the Department of State, and possibly also
someone from outside these departments who has experience in
these matters, be appointed to carry on discussions with Mr.
Churchill’s
representatives and to formulate appropriate recommendations for
your consideration. Members of the Science Advisory Committee
could be of considerable help to such a committee.
Respectfully yours,
[Page 708]
[Attachment]
Memorandum by the Science Advisory
Committee
secret
[Washington,]
December 11, 1951.
On Exchange of Technical
Information With Allies
Views of the Science Advisory
Committee
In formulating its views on the exchange of technical
information, the Science Advisory Committee recognizes that
in certain areas there are limitations now imposed by law
and that transmission of any technical information involves
risk of valuable information becoming available to our
enemies. This risk must, however, be weighed against
prospective benefits. Often, in military research and
development, rapid rate of progress and achievement is the
best security safeguard. The competence of the combined
Western nations in science and technology is so high that a
full cooperative effort is the best guarantee of supremacy.
The Committee recognizes, however, that as regards both
benefits and risks different allied countries are, through
force of circumstances, in different positions.
The Committee recognizes, too, that all arrangements for
exchange of technical information should be limited by
normal precautions against premature disclosure and by
protective measures for patenting new inventions and for
preserving the rights of private individuals and companies.
Subject to these considerations the Science Advisory
Committee has the following opinions.
- 1.
- As regards information outside of the field of atomic
energy, there should be full exchange with Great Britain
and Canada of technical information in matters of
defense research and development, restricted only in the
way in which it is restricted in this country. The
Committee believes that the benefit to our military
strength of such exchange, through the cooperation which
it will foster, will more than offset any unfavorable
consequences. This policy is, in the Committee’s
opinion, consistent with existing international
agreements, but there exists some question as to the
effectiveness of the present implementation of policy
that suggests need for a review of current practices in
this regard.
- 2.
- With other countries of NATO there should, for the same reasons, be
exchange of information adequate to the practical needs
of NATO defense. A
considerable flow of technical information is obviously
necessary if our allies are to be able to make effective
use of new military instrumentalities which have been
developed in the United States and if we are to benefit
from the substantial contributions which can be made by
allied scientists. In this connection it is possible
that the Science Advisory Committee may be able to be of
some assistance in consideration of means for extending
[Page 709]
the area
in which we talk freely to our allies and of the
advantage which we can expect to gain from cooperation
with their scientists.
- 3.
- As regards information on atomic energy, there are
different problems involved, including those of special
legislation, but there still applies the advantage of
the greatest possible freedom and encouragement of
scientific intercourse. To this end there is need for
exploring and defining areas in which interchange of
information would be mutually advantageous and for more
liberal legislation to permit such interchange under
proper safeguards. Beyond this there is need for special
cooperative arrangements with Great Britain and Canada
directed at achieving the maximum exploitation of our
joint resources.
