206. Memorandum From the Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs (Cleveland) to the Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (Foster)1
SUBJECT
- Present United States Efforts to Improve the Peacekeeping Capabilities of the UN
The development of UN’s peacekeeping machinery is an integral part of the U.S. disarmament program. It is also an important objective in United States efforts to strengthen, over the near term, the peacekeeping ability of the United Nations.
In moving from the administration of the United Nations Emergency Force in the Middle East (UNEF) to the administration of the UN force in the Congo (UNOC), the UN moved into an area of operational magnitude which placed major new strains on the organization. We have reviewed with the USUN, the Military Advisors Staff to the UN Secretary General, Ambassador Gullion and the Department of Defense the means through which the administration of the UN Congo operation would be improved. In particular we have looked at the need for strengthened command and policy control, for better logistic planning, and for officer training progress. We have also reviewed the Middle Eastern and Congo experience to see what it could tell us about more general moves for improving UN’s military and policing capabilities.
Our conclusions are set forth in the attached paper (Tab A) entitled “The Development of the Military and Policing Capabilities of the United Nations”.2 The paper was cleared throughout the Department of State, with ACDA, and with the Department of Defense, and was given to the British in February. The UK has informed us that they have requested their Imperial Defense College for a similar paper. We anticipate that these two papers will be taken up in bilateral talks with the British to be held probably during the last week in June or the first week in July. Most of the proposals would not require new General Assembly action. It might be advisable for implementation of some of the suggestions to await the election of a UN Secretary General at the 17th Assembly.
I would call your attention particularly to the following proposals:
[Page 439]1. The Ear-Marking and Training of National Forces for Use by the United Nations
In response to President Kennedy’s address to the United Nations on September 25, 1961, Norway, Sweden and Denmark informed the Acting Secretary General that they had ear-marked forces and equipment for UN military operations, in line with an earlier request of Mr. Hammarskjold in May 1961.
2. Officer Training Programs
Before his death Mr. Hammarskjold had approved a limited officer training program to be carried on in New York and in the field. The program was to be funded out of the current budgets of UNEF and UNOC. We understand that U Thant has now re-approved this training program. We expect it to be put into operation following the appointment of a UN Secretary General to a full five-year term at the 17th Session of the General Assembly.
3. Preparation of Manuals
The UN Secretary General’s staff has begun an assessment of UN’s experience in the Middle East and the Congo, with a view to manuals being prepared which could be used in an officer training program and in military colleges of member countries. (See proposal Tab A, page 6)
4. A UN Officer Training College
Our proposals recommend that the U.S., in cooperation with the UN Secretary General, explore the possibility of the UN establishing an officer training college—patterned in general on the NATO Defense College. Such an institution might be located at UN headquarters, or in a neutral country such as Sweden or Switzerland. It would be staffed in part by senior officers who have had field command and headquarters experience with the United Nations.
5. Policy Control Over UN Forces
We are giving earnest attention to means of strengthening policy control over UN policing operations (See Tab A, page 8). One idea which is receiving special attention is that each UN field policing operation might be under the advisory or policy direction of a consortia composed of these countries contributing the principal military, logistic, and financial support to the particular operation. These considerations are, of course, closely related to the more general ones concerned with future patterns of financing UN’s peacekeeping operations—beyond the bond issue.
UN’s work in peaceful settlement is a second major area in which it is important for new moves to be made in strengthening United Nations capabilities. We are now preparing specific proposals for discussion with [Page 440] the British in the bilateral conversations to be held in the early summer. I attach a memorandum (Tab B), prepared in IO, making preliminary suggestions.3 While the memo proposes certain specific measures which could be taken to strengthen UN’s peaceful settlement facilities, it places an emphasis (and I think an appropriate one) on the necessity for creating both a new world-wide political interest in UN operations in this area and a new general political atmosphere. I will be very interested to have your reactions to the suggestions which the memo sets forth.
As we move forward on these short-term possibilities, and as ACDA moves forward in outlining the longer-term ones, it is important that we keep in close relationship. Our proposals need to reflect ACDA’s long-term goals. I am sure you will want your projections to reflect the progress we are able to make over the near term.
In this respect, I think you will be interested in seeing a copy of a memo prepared recently by INR at our request, entitled “Soviet Attitudes Toward Development of Military and Policing Capabilities of the United Nations”. It is a direct commentary on the basic paper from which Tab A (a sanitized version) was prepared for the US–UK talks.