§ 28. Mr. A. Hendersonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what agreement has now been reached between the Western Governments and the Soviet Government with regard to their proposal for the appointment of a group of experts to study the technical problems involved in establishing a system of international control to verify the suspension of nuclear tests.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreI would refer the right hon. and learned Member to what my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal told the House yesterday afternoon and to what my right hon. and learned Friend told the House yesterday evening.
The following is President Eisenhower's reply to Mr. Khrushchev's Note of 30th May:
June 10, 1958.
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I have your letter of May 30 and am glad to note you have accepted my proposal that technical experts meet to study the possibility of detecting violations of a possible agreement on suspension of nuclear tests. These talks would be undertaken without commitment as to the final decision on the relationship of nuclear test suspension to other more important disarmament measures I have proposed.
18WI propose that these discussions begin on or about July 1 in Geneva. While we appreciate your offer to hold these talks in Moscow, we believe that Geneva would be preferable from our standpoint, and note that it would be acceptable to you. The Swiss Government has agreed to this location.
With respect to participation I suggest that initially at least we adhere to the concept expressed in your letter of May 9, 1958, where you say "The Soviet Government agrees to having both sides designate experts." As indicated in my letter of May 24, 1958, our side at this discussion will include experts from the United States. United Kingdom, France and possibly from other countries which have specialists with a thorough knowledge in the field of detecting nuclear tests, and we note that you have no objection to this. With regard to the inclusion on your side of experts from Czechoslovakia and Poland, we have no objection to this. With respect to experts of nationalities not identified with either side, we have no objection in principle to their joining later in the discussions if it is agreed during the course of the talks that this is necessary or useful from the point of view of the purposes of the technical talks.
It may be possible for the experts to produce a final report within three or four weeks as you suggest. However, I believe that there should be enough flexibility in our arrangements to allow a little longer time if it is needed to resolve the complex technical issues involved.
I propose that further arrangements for the meeting be handled through normal diplomatic channels.
DWIGHT D EISENHOWER