July 5, 1966

Professor Pavel Eisler
Frani Sramka 6
Praha 5, Czechoslovakia

Dear Pavel:

Just before the beginning of the Seminar it seems appropriate
to drop you a note to tell you how much we are looking forward to
our Czech participant--whom you so highly recommended.

I was talking to Shep Stone on the phone the other day and he
told me of his conversations in Prague. He was very pleased
with his reception and he was under the impression that the letter
he drafted (which you may have seen) contained his understanding
of a joint view. He was a little baffled at the lack of reply because
if he does not hear from your Ministry soon the program will at
least have to be postponed.

I am writing this to you on an informal basis. I wonder
whether you could look into it. Whatever the political differences
between our countries, it seems to me useful to keep open some
channels of communication.

When are you coming to this country again? When you do,
don't forget that you have a standing invitation in Cambridge.

With warm regards.

September 26, 1966

Akademik Frantisek Sorm
Predseda Ceskoslovenske Akademie Ved
Na'rodni S
Praha 1, Czechoslovakia

My dear Academician Sorm:

I would like to tell you how very much I enjoyed seeing you in Prague and Sopot and how impressed I was by the dignity with which you conducted yourself at Sopot and how much I appreciated everything you did to make my stay in Prague so pleasant.

I trust that the meeting in Prague was only the beginning of what will turn out to be a very useful cooperation on both sides.

With high regard.

cc: up fil

September 26, 1966

Professor Karol Lapter
Sandomrerska 21 m 11
Warsaw 12, Poland

Dear Professor Lapter:

Upon my return to the United States,
I would like to thank you for your help-
fulness during my stay in Poland. The
fact that the visit was such a memorable
one is due in no small part to the help-
fulness of people like yourself. I would
also like to give a suggestion that if
you ever would to pursue more systematically
the discussion on Germany which started
the Institute I would be happy to consider.

With warm regards.

September 26, 1966

The Honorable John A. Gronouski
American Ambassador to Poland
American Embassy
Warsaw, Poland

My dear Mr. Ambassador:

This is just a note, upon my return
to the United States, to tell you how much
I enjoyed our meeting. I was intensely
impressed by the way you handled your
job. I have taken the initial steps to
see to it that you are brought up to date
on Vietnam matters. The reaction in
the Department was quite favorable.

Warm regards.

September 26, 1966

The Honorable Jacob Beam
American Ambassador to Czechoslovakia
American Embassy
Trziste 15, Mala Strana
Prague 1, Czechoslovakia

My dear Mr. Ambassador:

This is just a note to tell you how
sorry I was not to be able to call
on you as you so kindly suggested.
Unhappily, my schedule closed in on
me.

I hope that if I visit Prague again
you will give me an opportunity to take
up your very nice suggestion.

With every good wish and kind regards.

September 26, 1966

Mr. Arthur Miedzyrzecki
Marszalkowska 68-47
Warsaw, Poland

Dear Arthur:

I have just returned to the United States and I do not want to lose any more time to thank you for your hospitality while I was in Warsaw. I enjoyed my two meetings with you enormously, and I was so glad to have the opportunity to meet your wife. I'm sure that this was just the first of many visits.

With warm regards.

September 28, 1966

Mr. and Mrs. Bohdan Mankowski
Commander PNR
Niecala 12/14
Warsaw, Poland

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Mankowski:

This is just a note to tell you how
very much I appreciated the hospitality
you showed me while I was in Warsaw.

I do hope to have the chance to see
you both again.

Best regards.

September 26, 1966

Mr. Jan J. Szezepanski
Helclow 21/3
Krakow, Poland

My dear Mr. Szezepanski:

I can't tell you how touched
I was by the fact that you took a spe-
cial trip from Krakow to see me even
though you didn't know whether we
would have a chance to meet. It was
a great pleasure to meet with you and
I very much appreciated the hospital-
ity of your sister and brother-in-law.

With warm regards.

Cornell University
VICE PRESIDENT FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS

ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850
AREA CODE 607, 275-5142

SEP 29 1966

September 26, 1966

Professor Henry Kissinger
Center for International Studies
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear Henry:

As I write this, you are presumably still enjoying the splendors
of Vienna and the yeasty thought of the Institute for Strategic
Studies. It really was a great pleasure to come to know you
better -- there is nothing like Shep Stone's bathroom and Polish
pontoon bridges for the cementing of lasting friendships.

A copy of our book *City and Regional Planning in Poland* is on its
way to you under separate cover. Let me know whether you are
interested in the Yugoslav Project -- we will have a formal report
on it ready within a month, and I would be glad to send you a copy
if you are interested.

I hope that I will soon have an opportunity to pay you a visit in
Cambridge. It would be even more interesting if you and I were
to find ourselves on the same side of the table again at some
other kind of joint endeavor.

SM:esa

September 26, 1966

Mr. Theodor Nemec
Secretariat
Czechoslovak Pugwas Committee
Parizska 11
Prague 1, Czechoslovakia

My dear Mr. Nemec:

I was sorry to miss you in Prague but you certainly
deserved a vacation.

I, too, enjoyed our cooperation in Sopot and I think
if the parliamentary situation had permitted it we would
have come up with something useful.

Even though you were not present at Prague your
office did wonders in organization. We were made to
feel at home and everything was handled with extraordinary
efficiency.

Thank you finally for the book you left at my hotel
and for the doll your secretary brought to the airport.

Warm regards.

OCT 27 1966

THE FORD FOUNDATION

477 MADISON AVENUE
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022

October 25, 1966

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS PROGRAM

Professor Paul Doty
Harvard University
12 Oxford Street
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

Dear Paul:

According to a friend in London, an article on the last Pugwash
Conference by Academician M. Millionschikov appeared in *Pravda*
on the 28th of September and contains the following three assertions:

1. "Among the participants of the Pugwash Conference in Sopot, there was nobody who has not raised his voice for the immediate cessation of the bombing of North Vietnam by the American planes."

2. "... all have agreed that the road to a peaceful solution to the German problem lies in the development of the peaceful relation between the two existing German states..."

3. "All the participants of the Conference declared that the difficulties which have arisen in connection with the demand of the Western powers to have the so-called international inspection of the underground tests, have a political character and do not have any scientific or technical basis."

Somebody ought to get the full text. If this report is accurate, I must
have attended a different conference.

Henry A. Klaasen

With kind regards.

4. pressure wish you handled working group at Robot. I admired the tactful and low-it was a pleasure to work with you.

Vietnam for three days--a realful prospect.

I will be doing down to Washington
conversation generated so much interest.

I am glad my memorandum of
September 20th.

Thank you for your letter of

September 20th.

Thank you for your letter of

Dear Frank:

Inbasa, New York
Cornell University
Advanced Studies
Vice President for Research and
Mr. Frank A. Long

September 28, 1966

CORNELL UNIVERSITY

ITHACA, NEW YORK

Vice President for Research
and Advanced Studies

SEP 2 3 1966

September 20, 1966

Dr. Henry Kissinger
Center for International Affairs
6 Divinity Avenue
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Dear Henry:

You will be pleased at the activity generated by the Memcom
which I passed around for you on the 18th.

As a first item I put it into the ACDA system via Fisher and
Foster. I also put it into the White House system via Spurgeon Keeny,
who said he would show it to Rostow and Moyers. I discussed it with
Hornig also.

During the late afternoon I went over to see Averill Harriman,
who was quite interested. As we talked Jerry Wiesner came in and
when he saw it, insisted we turn around and go back to McNamara who
had specifically asked Jerry if he had firm evidence that the Soviet were
really interested in a non-proliferation treaty. McNamara was obviously
pleased with the memo and the further details I could give and in turn
asked Harriman to get a copy of the memorandum into Rusk's hands
immediately. The evidence was that the whole thing was very timely.

Incidentally, as we talked in Harriman's office the cable from
you discussing conversations with Dobroscelski came in.

Best regards.

FAL/d
enc

cc: Professor Paul Doty

MEMCON

On the evening of September 14, V. Shustov, a member of the Soviet delegation, drew me into a lengthy discussion of Vietnam and the possibilities of a negotiated settlement. The next day, September 15, Shustov came to my group, of which he was not a regular member, and played a very conciliatory role in several drafting disputes. During the break, he came up to me and said he wanted to make a few points (on the problem of non-proliferation) which had been carefully considered. These were:

1. The Soviet Union is most anxious to conclude a non-proliferation treaty, if possible during this session of the General Assembly.

2. The sole obstacle was the clause making possible a collective nuclear force. This was not used as a pretext but was genuine.

3. The Soviet Union has no interest in disturbing existing consultative arrangements within NATO. When asked about the McNamara Committee, Shustov replied that unless it contained elements of physical possession of nuclear weapons by the Germans it would not be precluded by the new Soviet conception.

4. The Soviets were prepared to modify their treaty draft considerably in the direction of simplicity and the avoidance of excessive legalism. They did want a clause barring "direct or indirect access by non-nuclear powers to nuclear weapons on an individual or collective basis." He reported that this phrase did not preclude consultative arrangements. Shustov further said that this formulation was subject to modification and invited me to suggest changes. I avoided doing so and instead urged him to consider a less absolute formulation.

Comment:

I wrote down these four points and showed them to Shustov to make sure I had understood them. He seemed serious and well-informed. I cannot judge his influence.

Henry Kissinger

9/19/66

MEMCON

Comment:

Henry Kissinger

9/19/66

XVI W.G. 2

16th Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs

Sopot, 11 - 16 September 1966

Draft-Report from Working Group 2

"Reduction of Tensions and Political Settlements in Europe"

# 1. Problems of European security

The Group discussed, in accordance with the draft agenda under point 1, problems of European security. First, European security needs have been clarified. An agreement was reached that some objective and common needs for the European security can be already established, as for instance the recognition of the existing frontiers between the European states, the normalization of relations between the European states with different social systems, non-proliferation of atomic weapons, establishment of denuclearised zones in the most dangerous regions of Europe, peaceful settlement of the German question and promotion of a lasting system of security in Europe based on the guarantees of all European countries and factors including European development. Special security needs felt by some nations or important groups of populations can not be identified without further research to be made on this field, including polls of public opinion. It has been recommended to the Pugwash Study Group on European security to include this point into the programme of its future activity.

A large part of the discussion in the Group was devoted to the German question. First, problems of frontiers were subject of controversy, especially the frontiers between the both existing German States. Members from U.S.A. and F.R.G. refused to include the frontiers between the German States into any recognition of frontiers between the European states, other members pointed out that there can be no lasting security system in Europe without acceptance of all existing frontiers. Members from the F.R.G. stressed the idea that even the Oder-Neisse line can not be recognized by the F.R.G. without preliminary arrangements with the Polish Government.

The utility of the normalization of relations between the F.R.G. and the Socialist states in Central and Eastern Europe was generally recognized, as well as the fact that it is most probable that this process of normalization will develop step by step. Some participants strongly opposed the idea that G.D.R. should be included into this process on the same level as the other Central and Eastern European states, and it was not possible to come to an agreement between these two concepts. On the other hand, there was a complete agreement that the fact of the recognition of the G.D.R. by the European states in Central and Eastern Europe should not in any way represent an obstacle to the full normalization of relations between these states and the F.R.G.

XVI W.G. 2

- 2 -

The reunification of Germany was accepted by all members of the Group as a necessary part of any lasting system of security in Europe, and the fact was stressed that this process must be fulfilled only by peaceful means and with the full consent of the German people and that the reunified Germany should in no way represent a threat for European security. It was generally agreed that the reunification will be a long and difficult process. [Some steps to be taken in the near future in this field have been recommended and a subgroup has been formed to elaborate an agreed recommendation. Its text is included in this report.]

Complete agreement was reached about the utility of large and free trade relations between all European states and the recommendation has been made to the Study Group on European security to study this problem.

In the discussion on interrelations between world tensions and the tensions in Europe it was agreed that European security was closely connected, influenced and affected by the state of world security. For this reason the continued and escalated war in Vietnam must be considered as a real and growing danger for the security and peace in Europe.

European nations should help avoiding further escalation of this war and bringing it to an end.

Some participants in the group recommended to the Study Group in European security to accept also representatives of the great powers as full members of the Group.

## 2. Problems of the future organization of Europe

The Group discussed problems of the future organization of Europe on the basis of the reports of the Pugwash Study Group on European Security and of other contributions to the Conference. It was felt that many integrational processes extend beyond the frontiers of the present European nations; are inherent in the nature of modern science, technology and industry; and are independent of the difference in social system in Eastern and Western Europe. It was suggested that an increase in communication and co-operation between Eastern and Western Europe may lead to a lessening of tensions, but that it is also quite possible that some contacts may increase tensions. Contacts seem to lead to an effective lessening of tensions, when they consist of a co-operation satisfying the following conditions: /a/ a complete equality exists between the parties; /b/ it is a lasting and functional co-operation; /c/ the co-operating parties obtain something, which they could not get otherwise.

A number of concrete recommendations were made concerning increasing collaboration in /a/ the economic and industrial field, /b/ scientific, cultural and political relations.

XVI W.G. 2

- 3 -

## 2.1. a. Economic and industrial integration

The discussion has shown that especially in the following fields problems exist which extend beyond the borders of many European nations:

1/1 water supplies /it may be good to set up a Danube Valley Authority similar to the Tennessee Valley Authority in USA/

1/2 exploitation of natural resources

1/3 air and water pollution

1/4 energy policy /coal, oil, nuclear energy, natural gas/

1/5 weather control

1/6 technical standardization; patents

1/7 science planning /including"brain-drain" problems/

1/8 co-operation in co-production /joint factories on an equal base/

Many of these problems are highly technical and require the close collaboration of engineers and economists. It seems useful that one or more permanent European Agencies are set up concerning these topics; or are extended where certain international bodies are already existing/the precise geographical extent should be discussed further. It was proposed that the European Pugwash Study Group should make more detailed proposals, which may lead to a European Conference of specialists on these issues.

The above list does not pretend to be exhaustive; one may also think of more extensive projects of European economic planning. However, one should avoid creating such "fences" towards the "third world" that a widening gap in prosperity between Europe and the third world is thereby increased.

## 2.2. Scientific, cultural and political relations

The following specific suggestions have been made in these fields:

1/1 The importance of many international non-governmental organizations was stressed; much is existing already in the field of scientific collaboration; it is important that also the smaller European nations participate greatly in these relations.

1/2 Co-operation in education could be further extended including co-operation in "education for peace" and further comparison of textbooks for history, etc.

AGENDA FOR THE 16th PUGWASH CONFERENCE

SOPOT, POLAND, 11th-16th SEPTEMBER, 1966

"DISARMAMENT AND WORLD SECURITY, ESPECIALLY IN EUROPE"

MAY 31 1966

I. Disarmament in Europe

1. Reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons stockpiles.

2. Reduction of military forces and conventional weapons.

3. Non-aggression pact between NATO and Warsaw Treaty powers.

4. Nuclear-free zone in Central Europe.

5. Prevention of surprise attack.

II. Reduction of Tensions and Political Settlements in Europe

1. Elimination of remnants of the second World War in Europe and conclusion of German Peace treaty.

2. Normalization of relations between Germany and her neighbors.

3. East-West trade.

4. Problems of cultural and scientific exchange.

5. Problems of co-existence.

III. Main Problems of Progress toward G. C. D.

1. Resolution of current conflicts.

2. Problems concerning the projected International Disarmament Conference in 1967.

3. Bringing China into the disarmament discussions.

4. Strengthening the peacekeeping machinery of U. N.

5. Liquidation of foreign bases.

IV. Measures for Arms Limitation

1. Freeze, cutback of production and elimination of nuclear weapons and weapons materials.

2. Control over peaceful atomic energy applications and the role of the IAEA

3. Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

4. Non-proliferation agreement and the problem of guarantees.

5. Nuclear-free zones.

6. Anti-ballistic missile problem.

CONTINUING COMMITTEE

OF THE

PUGWASH CONFERENCES ON SCIENCE AND WORLD AFFAIRS

Secretary-General: Professor J. ROTBLAT

Chairman: The Earl Russell

Members:

Prof. E. Amaldi; Academician L. A. Artsimovitch; Prof. Bernard Feld;

Prof. Bentley Glass; Prof. L. Infeld; Academician V. M. Khvostov;

Academician I. Malek; Dr. H. Marcovich; Academician M. D. Millionschikov;

Prof. R. E. Peierls; Prof. C. F. Powell; Prof. Eugene Rabinowitch;

Prof. V. Sarabhai.

Assistant Secretary-General: Dr. Patricia J. Lindop

Telegraphic Address: Pugwash, London

8 ASMARA ROAD,
LONDON, N.W.2.

HAMstead 1471

25th April, 1966.

Dear Professor Kissinger,

Sopot, 11-16 September, 1966

I am writing on behalf of the Pugwash Continuing Committee to invite you formally to the 16th Pugwash Conference which is to be held in Sopot, Poland, from the 11th to the 16th September 1966. Some 80 scientists are expected to participate.

The theme of the Conference will be "Disarmament and World Security, especially in Europe" and the programme envisages four working groups; the topics for the working groups are enclosed. The subheadings are only for orientation purposes; they may be modified at the preparatory meeting to be held prior to the main Conference.

Except for the Opening Ceremony, all sessions of the Conference will be private. The reports from Working Groups, the conference papers and a summary of the discussions will be circulated in due course to former Pugwash participants, to Heads of Governments and other interested individuals or institutions. There will be no public statement from the Conference as a whole, but the Continuing Committee may decide to issue a press release after the Conference summarizing the main findings and conclusions.

The Conference is sponsored by the Polish Academy of Sciences. Full hospitality to Conference participants is offered by the Academy for the duration of the Conference. The Academy will also take care of the travelling expenses from Warsaw to Sopot and return, but not for the fare to Warsaw. The meetings will take place in the Grand Hotel where the participants will also be accommodated. Wives and other persons accompanying will be responsible for their own expenses.

[L.C.]

SOPOT, POLAND, 11th - 16th SEPTEMBER, 1966

I. Disarmament in Europe

2. Normalization of relations between Germany and her neighbours.

3. East-West trade.

5. Problems of co-existence.

2. Control over peaceful atomic energy applications and the role of the I. A. E. A.

5. Nuclear-free zones.

May 19, 1966

Mr. B.T. Feld
Room 26-405
MIT
Cambridge, Mass. 02139

Dear Bernie:

Thank you for your letter of
April 25th.

I will not be able to attend the meeting
on June 13-15 but I should almost cer-
tainly be able to come on August 29-30.

I look forward to participating in
the Conference and I am glad I was
asked.

With kind regards.

Henry A. Klaander

Sincerely yours,

With kind regards.

asked.
the Conference and I am glad I was
I look forward to participating in
to be able to come on August 29-30.
on June 13-16 but I should aim at cer-
ity I will not be able to attend the meeting

April 26th.

Thank you for your letter of

Dear Bernie:

Cambridge, Mass. 02139
MIT
Room 36-405
Mr. B.T. Feld

May 19, 1966

American Academy of Arts and Sciences

280 Newton Street
Brookline Station, Boston, Massachusetts 02146

Telephone 522-2400

APR 29 1966

Prof. H. Kissinger
Defense Studies Program
6 Divinity Ave.
Harvard University
Cambridge, Mass. 02138

25 April 1966

Dear Henry:

In connection with the next Pugwash Conference, to be held in Sopot, Poland, Sept. 11-16, 1966, the Academy's Committee on P-COSWA is planning two preparatory meetings. The first is to be held at the Academy headquarters on June 13-15; the second is scheduled for August 29-30, place as yet undecided (possibly the National Academy house in Woods Hole).

The purpose of these meetings is to discuss, in a larger and more varied group, the materials to be presented by the American participants at the Sopot Conference and, if possible, to develop new and promising approaches to the questions on the Agenda. The enclosed (somewhat over-) elaboration of the Agenda contains many possible questions, all of which could not possibly be adequately covered in the time available. From among these, I believe that our group might be able to make serious new contributions on items I.1, 2, II.1, III.1, IV.1, 3, 4.

In this respect, I would appreciate your views on the subjects on which we should concentrate at the June 13-15 meeting. Particularly, I would like to be able to circulate in advance of this meeting any papers or background materials which will be useful for our discussions, especially any new materials which you might be willing to prepare for possible presentation at Sopot.

The Academy is prepared to pay your expenses for travel to and from these meetings and to arrange for your lodging while here, if necessary. Please let me know if you can make it.

Looking forward to your collaboration in this enterprise, I remain,

P. S. Please reply to:
B. T. Feld
Room 26-405
M.I.T.
Cambridge, Mass. 02139

Suggested Elaboration on the agreed Agenda for the 16th Pugwash Conference,

Poland, September 1966

I. Disarmament in Europe

1. Reduction of nuclear weapons stockpiles

3. Agreement on prevention of surprise attack.

4. A nuclear free zone in Central Europe (Rapacki plan; problem of intermediate range nuclear missiles in Europe).

1. Non-aggression pact between NATO and Warsaw powers.

2. Achievement of a peace treaty ending W.W.II.

3. Normalization of relations between Germany and her neighbors; problems of German reunification.

4. Increasing east-west trade.

5. Problems of cultural and scientific exchange.

III. Main Problems of Progress toward G.C.D.

1. Strengthening the UN peacekeeping machinery.

2. Bringing China into the disarmament discussions.

3. Program for the projected International Disarmament Conference in 1967.

4. Resolutions of current conflicts.

5. New approaches toward a G.C.D. Treaty in the ENDC in Geneva.

1. Freeze and cutback of production of nuclear weapons and weapons materials.

2. Control over peaceful atomic energy applications and the role of the IAEA.

3. A Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

4. The non-proliferation agreement and the problem of guarantees.

5. Nuclear Free Zones

6. The ABM problem.

MAY 4 1966

29 April 1966

To: American participants in Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs

From: B. T. Feld, Chairman, Committee on P-COSWA of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences

Report on the Past Year

The Academy's Committee on P-COSWA for 1965-66 consists of:

B. T. Feld, Chairman

Paul Doty

Alexander Rich

E. Rabinowitch, Vice-Chairman

John Edsall

Charles H. Townes

Ruth Adams

Bentley Glass

Alvin M. Weinberg

Harrison Brown

Franklin Long

During the past year, there were two Pugwash Conferences. The 14th Conference was held in Venice in April, and the 15th took place in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, at the end of the year. The results of these Conferences have been reported in the Pugwash Newsletters.

About half of the Venice Conference and all of the Addis Ababa Conference were devoted to the theme of international scientific cooperation, especially as applied to the problems of the developing nations. One outcome of these discussions has been a growing enthusiasm on the part of the scientists from developing countries for the continuation of such informal and un- official meetings, possibly on a somewhat more regular basis than in the past. On the other hand, the need for a continuing discussion of disarmament issues remains pressing, and plans for the next four conferences (Sopot, Sweden in 1967, USSR in 1968, USA in 1969) do not leave much room for expansion into the development field. Accordingly, our American Academy Committee is seriously exploring the possibilities for establishing a parallel effort, still under the "Pugwash" banner but organized by a separate group within the American Academy, for the planning of studies and meetings on the development themes. Your ideas and opinions on such an enterprise would be greatly appreciated, and are hereby solicited.

Active planning is now well under way for the 16th Conference to be held in Sopot, Poland, in September of this year, on the theme "Disarmament and World Security, especially in Europe". Two pre-Conference planning meetings will be held by our group this summer, at which the (12) American participants hope to prepare new approaches to arms control problems with the help of a larger number of experts in arms control and European affairs.

The financial situation of the Academy's Committee is as follows: During the year there was an income of about $29,000, roughly in equal parts from Foundation grants, the Academy's Committees on Research Funds, and from individuals; our expenses amounted to about $23,000. We have still to cover expenses of preparation for and travel to the Sopot Conference and, as we are expecting no further income from grants this year, it seems appropriate at this time to make our annual appeal for individual contributions.

As in the past, and following the suggestion of the Continuing Committee that all Pugwash "alumni" should be requested to contribute $25 annually toward support of its London office, the first $25 of your contribution will be earmarked for the London office unless otherwise specified.

Such contributions are tax exempt. Checks should be made out to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and sent to:

B. T. Feld
Room 26-405
MIT
Cambridge, Mass. 02139