321. Memorandum From the Head of the Delegation to the Conference on Antarctica (Phleger) to the Secretary of State1
At the meeting of Heads of Delegations at 10:00 a.m. this morning, the following took place:
1. On the Article on nuclear explosions the Soviet representative stated that he had received instructions from his government that its final position was that it could not accept paragraph 3 of the South African draft, but would accept paragraphs 1 and 2 in principle. After some discussion as to whether paragraphs 1 and 2 were acceptable to the Soviet Union as they stood, the representative suggested reformulation of paragraph 1 so that the two paragraphs now read as follows:
“1. The use of nuclear energy, including nuclear explosions and the disposal of radioactive waste material in Antarctica, shall be governed by such rules as may be established under international agreements to which the Contracting Parties whose representatives are entitled to participate in the meetings provided for under Article VIII are parties.
“2. Pending the establishment of such agreed rules, nuclear explosions in Antarctica and the disposal there of radioactive material other than waste material resulting from nuclear processes in Antarctica, shall be prohibited.”
The Soviet representative said that he would recommend this language to its government and he felt that it met the principles on which his government had given him final instructions.
Argument as to the unreasonableness of prohibiting nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes except by amendment of the treaty produced no change in the Soviet position although the Soviet representative said it was willing to drop from the treaty all reference to nuclear explosions.
[Page 627]The Argentine and other representatives stated that under no circumstances could they agree to a treaty that did not contain some regulation of nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes. As further discussion on the subject seemed fruitless and as the delegates stated that they would have to refer the matter to their governments, the discussion then turned to the item on accession.
2. The Soviet representative said with respect to accession he had received final instructions that no accession clause would be acceptable that included accession by the members of the specialized agencies.
It was then pointed out that the Soviet Union had stated two final positions which unless accepted would mean that there would be no treaty.
The meeting then adjourned until 10:30 a.m. tomorrow in order that the delegates might refer the matter to their governments.
From discussions following the meeting it seems reasonable to assume that the Southern Hemisphere countries would accept the Soviet formulation rather than have no treaty and I would judge that the same is true with respect to most other delegations.
As previously reported, it would appear also that the remaining delegations would also accept elimination in the accession clause of reference to members of specialized agencies.
It is requested that these questions have your prompt consideration and instructions.
I will hold myself available to discuss the matter with you at such time as you may appoint. Obviously you will wish to consult those interested in the atomic field.
P.S. Paragraph 3 which the Soviet demands be dropped reads:
“Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is agreed that the Contracting Parties whose representatives are entitled to participate in the meetings provided for under Article IX may, in specific instances and by unanimous prior consent, grant a waiver from the application of the provisions of para. 2. Such a waiver shall relate exclusively to the furtherance of the scientific investigation or peaceful development of Antarctica or to the disposal of radioactive waste material there.”2