193. Airgram From the Mission to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to the Department of State1

CEDTO A-621

SUBJECT

  • COCOM Reaction to Swedish Liberalization of Strategic Trade with the Soviet Bloc

REF

  • A. State 1323742
  • B. CEDTO A–5933
  • C. Stockholm 9454
  • D. Stockholm 10685
  • E. Stockholm 10736

EXCON. 1. In COCOM on March 26 the Chairman raised again the matter of the recent Swedish liberalization of strategic exports to the Soviet Bloc in order to point out that COCOM could not directly approach the Swedish Government and that the individual member governments consequently have certain responsibilities in this matter. There was a general feeling that, in view of the understandings which have existed in this area up to now between Sweden and the member governments, Sweden should have consulted with some or all of the COCOM members before taking this action.

2. The discussion was somewhat inhibited by the lack of precise and detailed knowledge of the Swedish action. US Del reminded the Committee that he had requested further information from his authorities, [Page 545] and other dels agreed to try to obtain more facts on the action and the reasons for it.

3. During the course of the discussion, the Chairman stated his belief that the Swedish question, involving policy questions of relations with third states, should be dealt with in the full Committee rather than the Subcommittee on Export Controls. The Netherlands and French Dels both stated they believed the matter important enough to be dealt with by the full Committee in the first instance. These are the only replies so far given to the query put forward by the US Del at the previous meeting.

Trezise
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, STR 13–1. Confidential. Drafted by Roger C. Dixon (USOECD/STC) on March 28 and contents approved by Dixon. Repeated to Stockholm.
  2. Telegram 132374 to Paris, March 19, advised that more time was needed to evaluate the Swedish decontrol action and, before proposing a date for the next meeting of the COCOM Subcommittee on Export Controls, wanted the U.S. Delegation to ask the other delegations on March 19 whether the subcommittee was the best place to discuss the Swedish action and, if so, when. (Ibid.)
  3. CEDTO A-593 from Paris, March 21, reported discussion at the COCOM meeting on March 19 about the scheduling of the next meeting of the COCOM Subcommittee on Export Controls and the U.S. concerns over Sweden’s new policies on strategic trade. Most delegations favored a subcommittee meeting in the spring of 1969, and the U.S. Delegation agreed to provide more details on the Swedish matter to the COCOM Chairman. (Ibid.)
  4. Telegram 945 from Stockholm, March 6, reported the relaxation of the new Swedish export licensing controls over shipments to Communist countries. (Ibid., STR 12–3 SWE)
  5. Telegram 1068 from Stockholm, March 25, summarized a Swedish newspaper article about the new Swedish export regulations. (Ibid.)
  6. Telegram 1073 from Stockholm, March 26, summarized further newspaper stories about the new Swedish export regulations. (Ibid.)