Skip to content

Results:

31 - 40 of 529

Documents

August 1, 1961

Summary of Comments by N. S. Khrushchev concerning the Question of the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty with the German Democratic Republic

Khrushchev remembers the signing of peace agreement with Japan and the exclusion of the Soviet Union from it. He criticizes the politics of Adenauer and warns about the destructive effects of potential world war. Khrushchev suggests signing the peace agreement to avoid the possibility of a nuclear war against the US and its allies

1946

Letter, Ya. Malik to Cde. V.M. Molotov

In this undated memo, written sometime after July 1946, Malik informs Molotov that he has completed a new draft directive for the Soviet delegation in the Joint Soviet-American Commission cconcerning Korea.

May 31, 1946

Report on the Work of the Joint Soviet-American Commission to Implement the Moscow Decision of the Three Ministers concerning Korea

The Soviet delegation proposed procedures for the work of the Joint Commission on Korea and the terms for consultation with parties and public organization; specifically, it called for the Commission to consult and only listen to parties and organizations of Korea that agreed with the Moscow Decision. The American delegation refused this demand, causing lengthy disputes. A list of parties and public organizations from both South Korea and North Korea for the consultation were drawn, but the right-wing parties in the Democratic Chamber, the administrative body of South Korea, opposed the Moscow decision and Joint Commission decision, and the discussion associated with the formation of a Provisional Korean Government was halted.

December 6, 1946

Report from General-Colonel T. Shtykov to Cde. I.V. Stalin and Cde. V.M. Molotov

Shytkov concludes that the Soviet delegation cannot back down from its demands for the parties in Korea to support the Moscow decision. A reversal of this position, Shtykov writes, would lead to the domination of US-backed, right-wing parties to take control over the Provisional Government of Korea.

May 1967

Directive [from Mao Zedong] Regarding the State of International [Affairs]

Mao argues that Europe remains the strategic center of US-Soviet conflict.

October 28, 1966

The Issue of Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in the Conversations of Comrade Gromyko with US Government Officials During the 21st Session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA)

This document includes accounts of several conversations between Soviet officials and US diplomats, including Andrei Gromyko for the Soviets, and Dean Rusk and Arthur Goldberg for the Americans. The most pressing topic discussed during these meetings was figuring out mutually acceptable language to mollify Soviet demands that the NPT contain explicit prohibitions on the transfer of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear countries not just directly but through a military alliance, namely, NATO, remembering previous US attempts to nuclearize NATO through the Multilateral Force (MLF). Some attention is paid to fears not just of the Soviet Union but the US and other NATO allies as well about the FRG acquiring nuclear weapons. In addition to the focus on the semantic differences in the Soviet and American drafts of the NPT, the document emphasizes that one key area of common ground between the Soviets and Americans is the importance that an agreement be reached sooner rather than later before more countries acquire nuclear capabilities.

November 22, 1966

Correspondence Delivered to G. M. Korniyenko by D. E. Boster

This correspondence between Davis Boster and Georgy Kornienko recounts Boster's impressions of where US-Soviet negotiations on the NPT stand after reading Kornienko's report of a conversation with the US chargé. Boster summarizes areas of common ground between the US and the Soviets while also expressing the hope that what he describes as semantic differences over whether to explicitly prohibit transfers of nuclear weapons to a group of countries do not impede the achievement of a nuclear non-proliferation agreement. Boster closes by expressing the hope and willingness to continue negotiations in New York and reach an agreement.

November 22, 1966

Correspondence, 'To Forward to the Members of the CPSU CC Politburo and Candidate Members of the CPSU CC'

A note from D.E. Boster translated into Russian from the English. This correspondence references a previous conversation with the temporary Charge d'Affaires, John Gatry, about the NPT.

November 22, 1966

Reception of the US Chargé d'Affaires in the USSR (Gatry) on Nov. 18, 1966: Note to be Distributed to CPSU CC Politburo Members and Candidate Members

This note to be distributed to the Central Committee of the USSR describes a conversation between Andrei Gromyko and US Chargé d'Affaires regarding the Americans' proposed language in Article I of the NPT. Gromyko shared the concern of the Soviet government that the American draft as it stands says nothing about prohibiting the transfer of nuclear weapons under joint control to an alliance or group of countries, and that the Soviet government wants to close off all means through which to proliferate nuclear weapons. Gromyko raised other concerns with the American draft and requests that Gatry notifies the US government and Dean Rusk of their conversation with the hope that Soviet concerns can be addressed appropriately.

November 22, 1966

Concerning Roshchin's Conversation with Foster on November 17, 1966

This note summarizes a conversation between Alexei Roshchin and William Foster concerning Foster's views on individual provisions of the Soviet draft of the NPT, with Foster's primary concerns pertaining to Article I. The main issue of contention between the Soviet and American drafts is whether to explicitly prohibit the transfer of nuclear weapons on a group basis or within an alliance, as the Soviets desire, but to which the Americans do not want explicitly stated in the Treaty. Roshchin conveyed the readiness of the Soviets to continue discussions on Article I, to which Foster's response that he would need to coordinate with the White House on the official posture of the US government toward the new Soviet language on the issue.

Pagination