Skip to content

Results:

1 - 10 of 18

Documents

January 9, 1963

American Embassy Rome Telegram 1327 to the Secretary of State, Washington, DC

Following his instructions to begin reaching a deal, Reinhardt met with Andreotti. The latter raised the date of April 1 as sort of a deadline and asked Reinhardt how important it was, noting that it would better to remove the missiles after April 1 so it would not be an election issue, where the right could “condemn a great defeat,” while the left could claim a “great victory.” Reinhardt declared that Washington wanted the action on Jupiters taken “as soon as possible,” which Andreotti accepted, observing that an “optimum solution” would be a “two key” arrangement for Polaris, which he realized was not practical in the short term.

When Andreotti noted that the decommissioning of the Jupiter sites would be a “graphic step backward” for Italy in terms of direct Italian participation in nuclear defense, Reinhardt mentioned the replacement of Corporals with Sergeant missiles, which Andreotti acknowledged would be “helpful” for demonstrating a U.S. “presence” in Italy.

January 5, 1963

Letter, Robert S. McNamara, Secretart of Defense, to the Honorable Giulio Andreotti, Minister of Defense

Members of the Nassau Decisions Steering Group worked up the texts of letters from Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara to the Italian and Turkish Defense Ministers, which President Kennedy approved when he met with Dean Rusk and Thomas Finletter in Palm Beach on January 5, 1963. The State Department sent the letters later to Ankara and Rome later that day.

McNamara’s letters expand on the points about the need to replace Jupiters with Polaris missiles that he made to Andreotti and Sancar when he met them in Paris. To both, McNamara wrote that the Polaris force would be “on station” by April 1 as the replacement for the Jupiters. Writing to Andreotti, he also mentioned substituting “obsolete” Corporal with Sergeant missiles. In his message to Sancar, McNamara informed him that he is exploring the possibility of accelerated delivery of the F-104s and that “emergency actions” could make it possible to deliver the first squadron during April 1963.

January 3, 1963

Steering Group on Implementing the Nassau Decisions, 'Minutes of 2nd Meeting Held January 3, 1963, at 5:00 P.M.'

The Nassau Steering Group devoted its January 3, 1963, session to Jupiter removal diplomacy. Ambassadors Finletter, Hare and Reinhardt were present as well as McGeorge Bundy and Defense Department General Counsel John McNaughton. While the papers on the Jupiter that the committee prepared remain classified, the discussion summarized here covered some of the key issues. One was to avoid the word “withdrawal” when discussing the Jupiters and to use the word “replace” instead, as in replace Jupiters with Polaris SLBMs. Moreover, because of concern about leaks, there would be no reference to an April 1, 1963, deadline  in communications with the Italians and Turks. As April 1 would be six months after the Cuban crisis, State Department official Seymour Weiss wanted to “go to the mat” to keep any dates out of the official discussions because he worried that too much specificity would raise suspicions of a “deal” or would sound like an “ultimatum.”  Nevertheless, an April 1 date would be used for the timing of the stationing of Polaris submarines in the Mediterranean and some U.S. interlocuters would see it as a deadline.

The Steering Group also addressed the problems raised by the early deployment to Turkey of F-104Gs; making the fighter-bombers available by May 1963 would require the rerouting of planes that had already been assigned to the Republic of China (Taiwan), Denmark, Norway, and Greece. There would be a delay in deploying nuclear bombs for the F-104s until they were outfitted with Permissive Action Links (PALs), as required by President Kennedy, which was not likely to occur until later in the year.

December 13, 1962

Memorandum of Conversation between Minister of Defense of Italy, Mr. Andreotti, Secretary McNamara and Assistant Secretary Nitze

In a meeting with Italian Defense Minister Guilio Andreotti, McNamara had several matters to raise, but soon brought up the Jupiters and the need to “substitute something more responsive and less vulnerable to sabotage or direct attack.” When Andreotti raised the possibility of a naval deployment, McNamara agreed, suggesting assigning Polaris submarines to SACEUR (Supreme Allied Commander Europe), “with an Italian role in the targeting.” Suggesting that the U.S take the initiative on the matter, Andreotti preferred that it be settled before the spring 1963 elections.

December 13, 1962

McGeorge Bundy, 'Last Conversation with the President before NATO Meeting of December 1962'

Kennedy, McNamara and Rusk moved ahead with the Jupiters matter by making plans to bring it up with Italian and Turkish defense ministers at the NATO meeting in Paris in December 1962. The goal would be to persuade them of the obsolescence of the Jupiters, the dangers that they posed during the Cuban crisis and in future crises, and the need for “better arrangements,” such as “a rearrangement of Polaris deployments.”

President Kennedy continued to monitor the Jupiter missiles problem. During a meeting with Rusk a few weeks later, McNamara explained that President Kennedy, who he had seen in Palm Beach on December 27, had asked him what steps were being taken “to remove the Jupiters.” Consistent with that, McNamara favored the “earliest possible date” and asked whether a “deadline” could be set for April 1 to begin the removals.

March 21, 1990

Minutes of a Conversation of Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki with US President George Bush

Over two days of meetings, Bush and Mazowiecki discuss German reunification, the future of relations with the Soviet Union/Russia, and NATO.

March 12, 1965

Report by Permanent Representative to NATO Alessandrini

The report examines the evolution of the Atlantic Alliance and the uncertainty of the current phase, which consists of forces not always appropriate to its cohesion. Alessandrini analyzes both the transformations in the international context and those inside NATO, the issue of political, economic and military consultation, the debate about the multilateral force and ANF. The conclusion underlines - despite all the current problems - the positive results of the history of NATO, an alliance that represents to date not only the deterrence against possible Soviet threats, but also the most important interlocutor in an eventual East-West dialogue.

April 26, 1965

Report by Permanent Representative to NATO to Minister of Defense, 'Nuclear Problems'

The document is part of a broad series of "Informative Reports" drafted by RICA and sent by Alessandrini to Andreotti (Minister of Defense), concerning the forthcoming meeting in London of the Atlantic Council at a ministerial level.
With regards to nuclear problems, the document hopes for a gradual way out from NATO's current paralysis, through a process of integration, rather then the attempt to solve also these problems by mere coordination among the Allies.

May 10, 1963

Report by Permanent Representative to NATO Alessandrini to Minister of Defense Andreotti

Alessandrini's report to PM Piccioni and Minister of Defense Andreotti discusses current questions of defense that will be brought up in the upcoming Ottawa session. According to him, NATO should focus on its internal organization and in particular, developing a common nuclear force, despite the technical and political challenges of such project.

December 4, 1962

Report by Permanent Representative to NATO Alessandrini to Minister of Defense Andreotti

Italy's permanent representative to NATO Alessandrini writes to PM Andreotti in preparation for the upcoming Paris summit. He shares general remarks about the state of the alliance and current issues in international relations focusing on the German question, Cuba, and Sino-Soviet relations.

Pagination