Search in
ADD SEARCH FILTER CANCEL SEARCH FILTER

Digital Archive International History Declassified

SEARCH RESULTS

  • September 01, 1979

    Report by the Special Group on Control of Theater Nuclear Forces

    Report by NATO Special Group to the Ministers on how to approach negotiations with the URSS on INF.

  • September 28, 1981

    Memo on discussions by the Chairman of the SPD, Brandt, with the French President, Mitterrand, on 25 September 1981

    Description of discussions between Brandt and Mitterrand on European security and strategic balance between the East and West. Topics covered include France's nuclear forces and INF negotiations.

  • March 17, 1982

    Letter by the Chairman of the SPD, Brandt, to the General Secretary of the CC of the CPSU, Brezhnev

    Brandt's letter is on the inter-continental missile negotiations which took initiative in Geneva. According to Brandt, American's "Zero Option" plan is a good start however, is not satisfactory to provide a safer Europe.

  • April 29, 1983

    MAE DAP Memo on INF and START

    MAE DAP memo on prospective US-USSR INF and START negotiations, Soviet position and objectives, role of Europe in promoting an intermediate solution for INF. The paper addresses also the issue of the deployment in Western Europe of Pershing II and Cruise missiles, and discusses consultation in Atlantic Council with amb. E. Rowny on European role question in START talks.

  • May 17, 1983

    MAE DAP Memo on INF

    MAE DAP memo on resumption of negotiations on INF. Observations on Allied negotiating position regarding an intermediate solution. Discussion of the Soviet position (press conference by Foreign Minister Gromyko, statements by Secretary-General PCUS Andropov): The paper also discusses the issue of French and British national nuclear deterrents, deployment of Euro-missiles and Soviet SS-20, comments Allied countries and perspectives on the negotiations.

  • October, 1983

    Evolution of the deployment of Soviet intermediate missiles

    An exhaustive memo on the deployment of the Soviet Intermediate Nuclear Forces from 1977 to 1983.

  • October, 1983

    Memorandum comparing the Soviet Intermediate Nuclear Forces and the Anglo – French forces capable of reaching the Soviet Union.

    A comparison between the Soviet Intermediate Nuclear Forces and the Anglo – French system capable of reaching the Soviet Union. The memo uses data to demonstrate that the Soviet INF outnumbered by far NATO nuclear forces.

  • October, 1983

    Memorandum on Geneva INF negotiations and East-West dialogue, with particular focus on Italian-Soviet relations.

    A memo about the relationship between Italy and the Soviet Union during the Geneva negotiations. It suggests some steps that Italy should undertake to keep alive the East-West dialogue and to preserve Italian economic interests.

  • October 28, 1983

    Memorandum on the Ottawa meeting of NATO's Nuclear Planning Group

    Some reflections on the outcome of the NATO Nuclear Planning Group meeting in Ottawa. The Italian government praised the NATO resolution to keep the INF at a minimum level of deterrence, while critiquing the Soviet refusal to compromise.

  • November 12, 1983

    Memorandum on INF and START negotiations

    This memo to Prime Minister Bettino Craxi argues against the merging of the INF and START negotiations proposed by the Finnish government and backed by Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau. The memo suggests that the proposal could jeopardize the Geneva talks and harm European interests.

  • December 08, 1983

    Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 'Notes for the discussion: East-West relations'

    This report is part of a wide documentation prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the meeting of the Atlantic Council in Brussels in December 1983. A central theme is the installation of the INF in Western Europe and the consequent interruption of the INF treaty negotiations in Geneva by the USSR.

  • 1984

    Memorandum on East-West Dialogue

    This memo expresses the regrets of the Italian government for the failure of the INF negotiations. According to the memo, Italy “committed itself to the normalization of the East – West dialogue” and proposed resuming Mutual and Balanced Force Reduction talks.

  • June 06, 1985

    Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 'State of the Alliance'

    After the installation of INF in Western Europe, NATO's focus has returned to the issue of burden sharing. The US has demonstrated its dissatisfaction with the European contribution, and pressure to strengthen European defense is mounting.

  • June 06, 1985

    Report on Italian-Soviet Talks in Lisbon

    A short (untitled) document that summarizes the topics addressed in the Italo-Soviet talks in Lisbon and re-caps the key positions adopted by the two parties.

  • December 12, 1985

    Memorandum by Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 'FNI negotiations - Assessments of the American negotiator, Ambassador Glitman'

    A brief report by US Ambassador Glitman regarding the INF negotiations with the USSR. There is an increased willingness to negotiate, and the parties have come closer in some aspects, but major differences still persist.

  • February 17, 1986

    Washington, DC to Department of External Affairs (Canada), 'Alliance Problems Over INF'

    In a flurry of cables from February 1986, Canadian assessments focused on a chronic issue within NATO: in consultation within the alliance. The Special Consultative Group was used as a forum to “air views of allies,” hold briefings on the current state of negotiations, and to share a new negotiating position right before it was tabled. Canadian officials also warned of disagreement to come between the Europeans and the Americans over the “zero option,” the longstanding proposal to reduce both US and Soviet INF to zero.

  • February 19, 1986

    Brussels–NATO (BNATO) to Department of External Affairs (Canada), 'Alliance Problems Over INF'

    In a flurry of cables from February 1986, Canadian assessments focused on a chronic issue within NATO: consultation within the alliance. As this dispatch from Brussels concluded, paraphrasing Winston Churchill, “NATO nuclear collective consultation is the worst form, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

  • February 27, 1986

    Brussels to Department of External Affairs (Canada), 'Zero Option and the Europeans'

    Canadian officials warned of disagreement to come between the Europeans and the Americans over the “zero option,” the longstanding proposal to reduce both US and Soviet INF to zero. This dispatch from Brussels reported “substantial unhappiness” amongst the Europeans that the United States and the Soviet Union would discuss disarmament “even if neither of them believed in it.” Nuclear deterrence had prevented war in Europe for the preceding four decades, and US-Soviet discussions of disarmament only made it even more difficult to convince public opinion of deterrence’s continued importance

  • October 11, 1986

    Soviet-American High Level Meeting, Reykjavik, 11-12 October 1986, Record of Conversations in the Working Group on Military Issues

    Record of conversation between US official, Paul Nitze, and USSR Chief of General Staff Sergey Akhromeev. The two discuss the minutiae of nuclear disarmament, particularly the relative disarmament value of each part of the triad (nuclear-equipped bombers/ICBMs/submarine-launched missiles).

  • April 15, 1987

    Telegram by Permanent Representative to NATO Fulci to Ministry of Foreign Affaris, 'NATO - Restricted Council. Carrington's visit in the US; subject FNI'

    Secretary General Carrington describes his experiences during his recent trip to the US. He reports a wide-spread "puzzlement" among Americans regarding the European attitudes towards the issue of intermediate-range nuclear forces in Europe.