24. Editorial Note
At its 484th meeting on May 19, 1961, the National Security Council discussed military considerations involved in the resumption of nuclear testing. NSC Action No. 2426, approved by the President on May 19, reads:
“Noted and discussed a presentation by Dr. Harold Brown, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, based on a paper circulated to the members of the National Security Council on May 15 which reflects the views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Department of Defense.” (Department of State, S/S-NSC (Miscellaneous) Files: Lot 66 D 95, Records of Action by the National Security Council, 1961)
The account of the meeting in Seaborg’s journal reads as follows:
“From 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. I attended a meeting of the National Security Council at the White House. Present at the main table were: President Kennedy, Messrs. Dulles, Wiesner, Bell, Dillon, Bundy, Harold Brown, Gilpatric, Lemnitzer, McNamara, Chester Bowles, McCloy, me. At the side tables were: Fisher, Gullion, Curtis LeMay and a large number of military people. The purpose of the meeting was to hear a briefing by Harold Brown on questions bearing upon the resumption of atomic weapons testing. McNamara introduced Brown who then gave his presentation. After this briefing, there was general discussion. The President asked what the Russians needed most from testing, and the answer was that they did not need bigger strategic warheads, but most likely needed lighter, more maneuverable ones. The President asked LeMay, that if we made a strike, would we have enough to prevent retaliation; LeMay said we probably would not. LeMay suggested that both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. probably should go the route of the development of smaller missiles. The President asked further questions, such as the degree of reliability of the Atlas and Polaris, etc., and LeMay gave some estimates.
“The President said that the reactions from our embassies around the world all gave the estimate that the reaction to our resumption of testing would be very adverse. The President said that all factors must be weighed and, if the decision appears to be a close one, perhaps we should wait for a time before resuming testing; but if the answer seems clear, we should begin immediately to think of the public steps that should be taken.
“Bundy made the point that better evidence on the question of whether the U.S.S.R. is testing is very important. Dulles said that the evidence simply is not and cannot be good in the range of low yields, and whether we get the answer through Intelligence is just a matter of luck.
“The President then raised the question of our immediate course of action in view of the impending meeting between himself and Khrushchev [Page 70] on June 3rd. One possibility seemed to be that an announcement might be made Monday that the President was asking Arthur Dean to come back from Geneva, and thus the President could see him before he leaves for Paris at the end of the week. Another possibility might be to issue a statement over the weekend and have Dean come back in time for the Meeting of the Principals on Monday (May 22nd). He asked Mr. McCloy and Mr. Murrow to think about a course of action here. This course of action should also contemplate building up public attention to the problem posed by the Russian position. The President raised the question of where we should do the testing and on what time scale it should be announced if he does decide to resume.” (Seaborg, Journal, volume 1, pages 275, 282. Page references are not continuous because of interpolated materials in the journal as published.) Documentation on the inquiries to Embassies abroad and their replies is in Department of State, Central Files 600.0012 and 397.5611-GE for March-May 1961.
Seaborg states that at the President’s birthday dinner held May 27, Kennedy gave him the impression that he doubted there was any need for testing nuclear weapons at that time. (Seaborg, Kennedy, Khrushchev and the Test Ban, page 66)