Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, United Nations and General International Matters, Volume II

314. Memorandum From the Head of the Delegation to the Conference on Antarctica (Phleger) to the Deputy Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (Merchant)¹

Washington, November 17, 1959.

At the meeting of Heads of Delegations this morning the following took place:

1. The Argentine representative withdrew his proposal that all the areas south of 60 degrees be included in the area banned for nuclear explosions. He agreed that such explosions should only be prohibited in the treaty area.

This would make the Argentine proposal read as follows:

“Nuclear explosions shall not take place in Antarctica except with the prior consent of all the high contracting parties whose representatives are entitled to participate in the meetings provided under Article VIII.”

All the representatives except the Soviet Union approved this redraft.

The Soviet representative said he could not accept the provision that permitted such explosions with the prior consent of the contracting parties. He said he had definite instructions that such a provision should not be included. He stated that this was for the reason that the prohibition of nuclear explosions was a matter of principle and not subject to waiver, making reference to the Geneva meetings.

All other representatives made clear that the Soviet Union position was not supportable and it was quite clear that there was unanimous agreement that the Argentine proposal was acceptable and the Soviet one was not.

Then, in an endeavor to meet the Soviet proposal, the South African delegate proposed a formulation in substance as follows:

1. Nuclear explosions in Antarctica shall be prohibited.

2. Notwithstanding the foregoing and having in mind future scientific developments and international agreements relating to nuclear energy, it is agreed that such explosions for peaceful purposes may take place in Antarctica with the unanimous consent of the Article VIII parties.

The Soviet wished to place consent on the basis of amendment of the article covering prohibitions but this was opposed upon the grounds that it would amount to an amendment of the treaty and require ratification.

The meeting adjourned to reconvene at 3:00 p.m. to consider proposals that might meet the Soviet point of view without sacrificing the right to have such explosions by unanimous consent.

2. The Soviet Union brought up the question of accession and produced a redraft providing for accession open to members of the UN and to others invited by unanimous act of the Article VIII powers. I stated the U.S. position was that it would accept the New Zealand proposal permitting accession by UN members and members of specialized agencies with the Soviet amendment adding states invited by unanimous consent of the Article VIII powers. The Soviet representative then entered into a long explanation of its position, saying that the formula for accession by members of specialized agencies discriminated against socialist states, citing the fact that it included West Germany and not East Germany and South Korea and South Vietnam and not the competing regimes. At this point we returned to a consideration of the article prohibiting nuclear explosions.

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 399.829/11–1759. Confidential. Drafted and initialed by Phleger.