267. Letter From the Ambassador at Large (Bowles) to the Ambassador at Large (Thompson)0

Dear Tommy: I came away from my conversation with Dobrynin on Thursday1 with renewed conviction that a struggle of decisive importance may be under way in the Kremlin.

[Page 579]

I was struck in particular by the intense interest with which Dobrynin received my repeated comment that, with good management and a genuine desire in Moscow as well as in Washington, the time might be approaching when a breakthrough would be possible in the area of arms control; and that this, in turn, could lead to fruitful Soviet-American cooperation on a wide variety of fronts, particularly in Asia.

In reacting to my comments, Dobrynin seemed at times to be virtually pleading for some sign from us that would make Khrushchevʼs task easier in achieving such a breakthrough.

If, in fact, such possibilities are now being debated in the Kremlin, might it not be useful for us to provide the more moderate elements in the Soviet leadership with tangible, up-to-date evidence that we are prepared for some basic discussions once the Cuba crisis is behind us? And could this not be effectively achieved if the President, in answer to a question at tomorrowʼs press conference, were to refer to and quote from his UN speech of September 25, 1961?2

He would of course want to stress, as a prior condition for such discussion, that Mr. Khrushchev live up to his promises to liquidate the present Cuba impasse.

I am attaching a copy of the Presidentʼs UN speech; also a copy of the report of my conversation with Dobrynin.3

With my warmest regards,

Sincerely,

Chester Bowles4
Presidentʼs Special Representative
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 611.61/11-1962. Confidential. Drafted by Bowles. Copies were sent to Manning and Sorensen.
  2. See Document 265.
  3. For text of this speech, see Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: John F. Kennedy, 1961, pp. 618-626.
  4. Neither printed.
  5. A note on the source text indicates it was signed in Bowlesʼ absence.