Authority record. Showing 207 results

The AC/297 chronological series contains the records of the Ad Hoc Committee on Equipment Interoperability. This was a temporary committee originally established for one year by the North Atlantic Council on 28 January 1976 (see C-R(76)3). Its terms of reference were presented at its first meeting, held on 5/2/1976 (see AC/297-D/1). It gave an interim report to the Council at each Ministerial meeting; the Council would then decide whether to prolong the Committee's work (AC/297-D/1).The Committee was chaired by the Deputy Secretary General. It was made up of the deputy permanent representatives, assisted or represented as required by defence counsellors from the delegations or national experts on technical matters (see C-R(76)3). The ASGs for the Defence Support, Defence Policy and Planning and Political Affairs Divisions also attended, as did representatives of the Military Committee (including the Chairman of the Military Agency for Standardization) and representatives of the three Major NATO Commanders. The Committee was empowered to draw on the services of existing NATO bodies whenever appropriate (see PO(76)7). The Committee was tasked: - firstly with determining "where the capability of the forces of the nations of the Alliance to operate together or support one another is seriously constrained due to the lack of interoperability of equipment"; - then with developing specific recommendations for correcting those deficiencies expeditiously; - and finally with preparing proposals for procedures to ensure adequate interoperability of equipment in future (see PO(76)7). Based on work already carried out by the Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD) and its subordinate bodies, by the Military Agency for Standardization, by the Major NATO Commands and by the international staffs, and also based on the initial proposals by the NATO Military Authorities (see C-M(76)28-REV1), the Council identified the five most pressing areas. It was agreed that others could be added subsequently, but this did not happen. Consequently the Committee established five working groups to develop specific action plans on a full-time basis (see C-R(76)3). They were made up of some Committee members and national experts (see PO(76)7). They were the Working Group on Communications – Tactical Area Communications (WG1), the Working Group on Cross-Servicing – Tactical Aircraft Rearming (WG2), the Working Group on Ammunition – Tank Gun Ammunition (WG3), the Working Group on Fuels – Naval Ships and Land-based Military Jet Aircraft (WG4) and the Working Group on Implementation of STANAGs – Those STANAGs which would give the greatest improvement in military effectiveness and flexibility (WG5). The Working Groups met several times a year and submitted provisional reports to the Committee. On the basis of those reports, the Committee prepared its report to the Council for each Ministerial meeting (see C-M(76)70-REV1) in which it invited the ministers to note the progress made and to endorse the proposals for action. The Committee held its last meeting on 7 November 1977, inviting the Council at that time to approve the disbandment of the working groups that had completed their work. The decision to disband the Ad Hoc Committee itself was postponed until the December 1977 meeting (see AC/297-D/41-DRAFT).

The AC/111 chronological series contains the records of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Pipelines.At its meeting on 18 July 1956 (C-R(56)40), the Council examined a note submitted by the French delegation (C-M(56)95). It subsequently decided to set up an ad hoc working group responsible for submitting recommendations to it on the French proposals seeking a revision of documents C-M(55)74 and C-M(56)83 in connection with the Central Europe area.France felt that it was necessary to decentralize the NATO POL pipeline system as much as possible in order to ensure that it operated smoothly. With this in mind, it suggested that a national pipeline operating agency be set up in each country of Central Europe, and that the role of the NATO Central Europe Operating Agency be modified.The Working Group made up of representatives of the user nations of the Central Europe Pipeline System met for the first time on 27 July 1956 under the chairmanship of Mr A. F. Moreau, Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Production and Logistics, assisted by representatives from the user nations, members of the International Staff and representatives from the Permanent Group and SHAPE.The Working Group examined the French proposals and produced a report which contained a specific project for the organization of the NATO Pipeline System in the central European region, which provided for the creation of a national agency in one or more countries, and which took account of the pressing need to put in place functional units known as "Divisions". This document, which is dated 11 December 1956, was submitted to the Council under reference C-M(56)129.The Council approved the text at its meeting on 19 December 1956 (C-R(56)77), and decided to recommend that interested countries immediately establish the proposed Organization, to wit the Central Europe Operating Agency and the Central Europe Pipeline Office.On 26 November 1956, after completing its work, the Working Group decided to disband.

The AC/200 chronological series contains the documents of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Resolution C-M(60)142.This group was created by the Council in March 1961, on a proposal by Turkey. It was tasked with identifying the means of implementing the resolution on assistance to the less-developed member countries which was adopted at the December 1960 Ministerial (C-M(60)142).In addition to the representatives from Greece, Turkey and members of the International Staff, the Group consisted of delegates from the following seven countries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. It was to report to the Council before the Oslo Ministerial and, with this in mind, it prepared a draft report in which it recommended sending a mission to Greece and Turkey. The Council approved this planned mission and tasked the Secretary General with choosing the officials who would be going.After this decision was made, the Group felt that its work was completed.

This chronological Series contains the agendas created for the meetings of the Defence Committee.

International Military Staff Memorandum

International Military Staff Working Memorandum

Military Staff Memorandum

Military Committee Working Memorandum (MCWM)

The Annual Review chronological series contains records on the annual defence review process.During the period 1952-1966, completing this annual review was one of NATO's primary tasks. The process developed and became one of the pillars constituting the Alliance's foundation for the development of its defence. The Annual Defence Review was at the core of the International Staff's activities for several years.In February 1952, the Council decided to carry out a comprehensive review each year of the requirements generated by the establishment and maintenance of a satisfactory defence posture based on actual performance capabilities from the political and economic standpoints. The Annual Review Committee was thus set up to supervise and co-ordinate all work in this area(1). One of the Annual Review's goals was to produce a clear presentation of the defence effort being made by each country. In July 1952, the first questionnaire entitled "Questionnaire adressé aux pays en vue de la réunion annuelle 1952 des besoins qu‘entraînent la création et l’entretien d’une puissance défensive" was finalized. Once adopted, it was circulated to the Member Nations. Replies were to be sent into the International Staff. Their review could thus begin.Over the years, the Annual Review was amended so as to streamline it and enhance its impact in the member states. In general, the documents pertaining to the Annual Review consisted of the following parts: - a preface and directives for preparing the memorandum; - three sections on the various forces: Army, Navy and Air Force; - an economic and financial section and annexes containing instructions on how to answer the questionnaire.By the early 1960s, the procedure to be followed for the Annual Review had become quite cumbersome. Too complicated, and seeking to address too many questions in detail, the Annual Review no longer fully met the goal assigned it. It proved inadequate as a means of pressure in the case of serious divergence between the requirements of NATO military authorities and the actual force contributions of member states. Beginning in 1959, the nations began to question its effectiveness. In January 1960, the Council tasked a Steering Group (AC/159) to look into whether changes might be made to the Annual Review in order to make it both simpler and more effective. In its report, the Group proposed that the Review no longer be carried out each year, but every three years instead. It would thus be possible, every three years, to reassess the defence programmes of the nations in the light of NATO's overall requirements. Because of the circumstances, this three-year procedure was never fully implemented.For the cycle commencing in 1962, the Annual Reviews dealt with the force requirements for 1962-1966. The work was carried out according to the following schedule: - 1962 - Triennial Review covering the force goals for 1963 and 1964 ; - 1963 - Interim Review covering the force goals for 1964; - 1964 - Annual Review covering the force goals for 1965; - 1965 - Interim Review covering the force goals for 1966; - 1966 - pending publication of the long-term force plans, the Annual Review for 1966 covered the force goals for 1967.Starting in 1963, the Annual/Triennial Review took a back seat to preparatory work for NATO long-term planning, which was decided upon at the Ottawa Ministerial. Under the new procedure, instead of focusing on the situation in each country, a horizontal approach to the consideration of problems was adopted. The Annual Review Committee was disbanded and, beginning in 1967, it was replaced by the Defence Review Committee(2).

The AC/19(WG) sub-series contains the records of the Ad Hoc Working Group of the Annual Review Committee.

The Ad Hoc Working Group was created by the Annual Review Committee on 20 January 1958 to create draft reports to the North Atlantic Council. The Working Group was chaired by the Assistant Secretary General for Economics and Finance, and consisted of representatives from France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States (AC/19-N/36).

The Working Group issued documents that dealt with the implementation of resolution C-M(54)85, which itself addresses defence co-operation with the Western European Union, and increased authority for SACEUR.

The AC/74 chronological series contains the records of the Armaments Committee.The Council approved the report of the Working Party on the Formation of a Defence Production Committee(1) on 20 April 1954, and such a committee was rapidly established with the designation Defence Production Committee (C-R(54)15, part 3). Its tasks, laid down in the terms of reference dated 10 April 1954, were: to advise the Council and make recommendations on policy questions in the field of defence production, to draw up its working programme and keep the execution of that programme under review, to set up expert and working groups, draw up their terms of reference, consider their reports and formulate recommendations accordingly; to establish close working relations with other appropriate NATO bodies; to meet at regular intervals and report directly to the Council (C-M(54)29). For this purpose national armaments specialists, International Staff members and Standing Group representatives met, from 6 May 1954, chaired by the Assistant Secretary General for Production and Logistics. The Committee took in hand all the armaments working groups which were designated expert groups. It was very active and did essential work for defence through these expert groups. It created new groups, such as the Liaison Group for Spare Parts (AC/74(LG)) and the Working Party on the Application of the New Assumptions to the Emergency Planning Work of the Committee (AC/74(NA)) in 1955.The Defence Production Committee operated in this way until August 1958, when its terms of reference and its name were changed. With the rapid development of science and technology the emphasis must then be shifted to cooperation on research in advance of production. On the basis of analysis by the French, German, Netherlands and United States delegations the Armaments Committee’s terms of reference were extended to cover pre-production matters (C-M(58)107), and a Joint Working Group on Cooperation in the Field of Armaments (AC/142) was set up which was to recommend the NATO basic military requirement (NBMR) procedure. In the following years the Committee put considerable work into procedures to facilitate the initiation and completion of cooperative arms production projects. But in spite of progress the result, with some eight major production programmes (but only one springing from a NATO basic military requirement) was deemed insufficient.The failure of the NBMR method led the Organization to develop a new more flexible concept, dissolving the Armaments Committee in September 1966 and completely reorganizing all bodies responsible for defence production (C-M(66)33(Revised)). This reorganization was intended to give new impetus to cooperation in NATO, with the new Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD) and NATO service armaments groups taking on the functions of the vanished Armaments Committee.

The AC/10 chronological series contains the records of the Committee on the North Atlantic Community.Established in October 1951, this Committee was responsible for making recommendations on foreign policy co-ordination and discussions, closer economic, financial and social ties and, finally, co-operation on culture and information. To assist it in its duties, it set up a working group tasked with the preparatory work for the Committee’s endeavours, whose duties are detailed in the first document of the series (see AC/10-D/1). The Committee and the Working Group both met in Belgrave Square, London and, in the documents, are often referred to indiscriminately.A report (see C/8-D/6) was submitted to the Council by the Committee in February 1952. The Council agreed the Committee’s recommendations, including the resolution to eliminate the Committee and to transfer its role and responsibilities to the North Atlantic Council.

The APAG chronological series contains the records of the Atlantic Policy Advisory Group.Established in 1961 by the Council, the purpose of the Group was to "provide the North Atlantic Council with studies on long-term policy problems" (C-M(61)101). It was believed that these informal meetings of high ranking officials of the Foreign Affairs Ministries would provide for wide ranging discussions on the international situation. The free, off-the-record discussions on long-range policy questions were summarized in a report presented to the Council by the Assistant Secretary General for Political Affairs under his own responsibility.The meetings were usually held twice a year, in spring and in the autumn, over several days, in an isolated location of a member country conducive to fruitful exchanges. The topics discussed were first approved by the Council following suggestions by the Group. Attendants started with a "tour d'horizon" on political developments which had taken place since the last meeting, usually followed by one main theme.In June 1969 the US authorities suggested changes to the operation of the Atlantic Policy Advisory Group; in PO(69)329 (dated 2nd July 1969), the Secretary General proposed a new system to be tested over the next two years. The first meeting of the year would continue in its traditional format and the report would be circulated by the Chairman for discussion by the Council. The Council's discussions on the report would then form the agenda for the second meeting of APAG which would address medium-term policy questions of more practical concern to the Alliance. In 1974 it was proposed to discontinue the second type of yearly meetings based on the experience of the previous three years.

The North Atlantic Council (NAC) is the principal body and the highest authority of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; its Terms of Reference are constituted by Article 9 of the North Atlantic Treaty: "The Parties hereby establish a Council, on which each of them shall be represented, to consider matters concerning the implementation of this Treaty. The Council shall be so organized as to be able to meet promptly at any time. The Council shall set up such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary: in particular it shall establish immediately a Defence Committee which shall recommend measures for the implementation of Articles 3 and 5."Originally made up of the Foreign Ministers, its composition was modified in 1951 to include Defence and Finance Ministers. The Council held nine sessions [C1 to C9] between September 1949 and February 1952, when it was transformed into its current form as a permanent body. At the time Council noted that "In order to function in permanent session with effective powers of decision, each member government should appoint a Permanent Representative who should represent his Government on the Council when its Ministerial Representatives are not present." In April 1952 the permanent headquarters of the Council were transferred to Paris and in 1967 to Brussels. From May 1950 to the February 1952 reorganization, the Council's directives were executed by a permanent body, the North Atlantic Council Deputies (D). The Council Deputies were formally abolished on the 5th April 1952.The Presidency of the Council (Présidence d'honneur) is entrusted to one of the Foreign Ministers according to an annual rotation following the English alphabetical order of the member nations. The Secretary General chairs the Council in permanent session and since 1957 in Ministerial session. The Council in permanent session meets at least once a week and in Ministerial session in the spring and in December at NATO HQ.Regardless of the level at which it meets – Permanent Representatives, Foreign Ministers, Heads of State or Government – the decisions of the Council have equal validity. Decisions are taken on the basis of unanimity and no voting takes place. In January 1964 the Council decided that the regular weekly meeting should begin in restricted session with a standing item "Statements on Political Subjects." This decision was based on the desire to give impetus to more frequent and thorough political consultation. No official record of these discussions are issued. Private meetings of Permanent Representatives are also held when necessary and no official record of these meetings is issued.

The AC/120 chronological series contains the records of the Central Europe Pipeline Policy Committee.The CEPPC began its work in December 1956. It was made up of representatives from the eight NATO nations which were using the Central Europe System, i.e. Belgium, Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. Representatives from SHAPE also attended the meetings. At the start of its first meeting on 17 December 1956, the Committee elected an interim president, Mr. A.L.M. Cary (UK Representative).As provided for in C-M(56)129 (as approved by the Council on 19 December 1956 (C-R(56)77)), the Committee was tasked with acting in close cooperation with the Central Europe Pipeline Office on all matters related to the operation and maintenance of the Central Europe Pipeline System and, in particular, it was required to define and allocate financial and economic liability. Its prior approval was necessary for all decisions by the Central Europe Pipeline Office, the Central Europe Operating Agency, and the national agencies and divisions with respect to the allocation of common funding. In addition, the Committee was tasked with formulating and recommending solutions to all conflicts of a financial or economic nature dealing with the operation and maintenance of the Central Europe system. It appointed its own Chairman, and met only as required.The NATO Pipeline Committee operated under the same name until late 1997(1). It was subsequently replaced by the new "CEPMO Board of Directors" (2).

The POLADS(1) series was established in the early 1960's to forward in an informal manner communications from the Chairman or the Secretary of the Political Committee to individual members of delegations. Originally produced on a hectograph machine as a "blue", the documents of this series were subsequently stencilled and circulated by the Central Registry. They were microfilmed as a series from 1970. From 2004 onwards the series ceased to exist as a separate series and was circulated as a subset of the AC/119 series.

Personal business letters from the Chairman of the Military Committee (CMC)

The AC/23(CD) chronological series contains the records of the Civil Protection Committee (hereinafter referred to as the CPC). The CPC was established and its terms of reference approved by the North Atlantic Council (Council) on 19 November 1952 as proposed by the Working Group of Civil Organization in Time of War (AC/23) (see C-R(52)29 and AC/23-D/25). The initial terms of reference were revised on 04/08/1966 (C-M(66)66), 07/11/1988 (AC/23-D/798) and 05/10/1994 (AC/23-D/818). Within its terms of reference, the CPC's tasks were defined by the MInisterial Guidance for Civil Emergency Planning (CEP) (for example, C-M(81)21), which was part of the Civil Emergency Planning and Review Cycle. The CPC was one of eight Civil Emergency Planning (CEP) planning boards and committees which were intended to ensure, in the event of an attack, the survival of populations, the support of military operations, the protection and use of vital resources, and the early recovery and rehabilitation of countries (see AC/12-D/357).The CPC dealt with the international coordination of planning in the area of civil protection at times of crisis or war (see AC/23-D/98). More specifically, it supervised the effectiveness of the NATO Refugee Agency (NRA), coordinated NRA participation in NATO exercises, drew up joint action plans in the event of attack and analysed the consequences (see AC/23-D/798 and C-M(66)66).The CPC did not deal with general policy issues in the area of civil protection. These were the responsibility of AC/23, which was the superior body (see AC/23(CD)-D/1). The CPC met at least once a year. Each member country could be represented, as well as the NATO Military Authorities. Its chairman was appointed for a three-year term. The chairmanship was preferably rotational (see AC/98-D/161). It reported to the Civil Emergency Planning Committee (CEPC) and, through the latter, to the Council (PO(2010)0074-REV2).The CPC was authorized to create bodies to assist it in specific tasks; in 1965 there were nine such subordinate bodies (see AC/23(CD)N/108).

The AC/110 chronological series contains the records of the Committee of Technical Advisors.This committee was created by the Council in July 1956, with the primary purpose being to come to the aid of the underdeveloped countries (proposal by the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Christian Pineau). Consisting of representatives from each member country, the committee worked under the authority of the Council. It was tasked with summarizing the position taken by each member nation on the links between the problems of economic development in the underdeveloped countries on the one hand, and the stability and well-being of the NATO member nations on the other, as well as the various economic and technical aspects of the Pineau plan. The Committee met for the first time on 23 July 1956. It submitted its report to the Council on 18 December 1956 (C-M(56)142), which discussed it at its meeting on 16 January,1957 (C-R(57)3).In January 1957, the Committee was disbanded following the creation of the Economic Committee(1), to which its functions and responsibilities were transferred (C-M(56)127).

The AC/19 chronological series contains the records of the Committee of the Annual Review. At the conference held in Lisbon in February 1952, the Council decided that the relevant NATO bodies should undertake an ongoing review of the requirements arising from the creation of an adequate defence capability (C9-D/20 dated 23 February 1952). The Council and the International Staff should be organized in such a way that the requirements of NATO programmes would coincide with the real possibilities of implementation at the political and economic levels. With a view to supervising and coordinating all activities in this area, the Council decided at its meeting of 6 May 1952 to set up a working group on the annual report under the chairmanship of the Deputy Secretary General (C-R(52)2).This working group, which was soon to acquire committee status(1) (ISM(52)29), met for the first time on 8 May 1952 under the chairmanshipof Mr H. van Vredenburch, Deputy Secretary General. The Committee of the Annual Review comprised representatives of all the NATO member nations, together with representatives of the International Staff and the Standing Group Liaison Office.The role of the Committee was to supervise the organization of the annual review in order to ensure that political and military directives were implemented. One of the aims of the annual review was to form a clear idea of the defence effort of each nation. The first meetings were mainly devoted to the organization of the annual review and the establishment of working groups(2). Thereafter, each year, the Committee laid downthe procedure, set the work schedule and issued instructions for the overview report to the Council. During its meetings it examined the information provided by member nations in response to the questionnaire on their defence status. The annual review underwent a number of modifications over the years, but in general the procedures changed very little.By the beginning of the 1960s the annual review procedure had become very time-consuming, and nations began to question its efficiency(3). In January 1960, the Council tasked the Steering Group(4) with studying possible modifications to the annual review to make it both simpler and more efficient. The Group’s report proposed that the review should be carried out on a triennal rather than annual basis, so that nations’ defence programmes could be re-assessed every three years in the light of NATO’s global requirements. Circumstances prevented the triennial procedure from being fully implemented.From 1963 onwards, the annual/triennal review ceased to be a priority and was eclipsed by the preparations for forming long-term plans for NATO as decided at the Ottawa ministerial meetings. Under the new procedure, the Committee should adopt a horizontal approach to problems rather than focusing on the situation in each country. The last annual review organized by AC/19 was in 1966. The Committee of the Annual Review was disbanded and replaced by the Defence Review Committee as from 1967(5).

The AC/39 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on the Annual Review Procedure.
From 1952 to 1966, the annual review was one of NATO’s main tasks. This process evolved to become one of the factors guiding the development of the Alliance’s defence(1).
At its meeting on 15 December 1952, the Committee of the Annual Review approved a proposal put forward by its Chairman, who emphasized "the urgent need for agreement on procedure for the completion of the 1952 Annual Review and for the 1953 Annual Review" and suggested that "a Working Group should be set up immediately to consider these points with a view to recommending the procedure for the work to be accomplished by the Spring and the additional information to be requested from Governments for the completion of the Annual Review"
(AC/19-R/32).
The Working Group on the Annual Review Procedure which was then set up met for the first time on 16 December 1952 under the chairmanship of Mr J. K. Horsefield, a member of the Economics and Finance Division. AC/39 comprised representatives of member nations and the NATO International Staff. Representatives of the Standing Group and SHAPE also attended the meetings.
The Group’s first task was to examine the proposals drawn up by the International Staff for the final period of the 1952 annual review. It then quickly turned its attention to the procedure to be put in place for the 1953 annual review.
In the coming years, in addition to establishing the procedure, which was in fact the responsibility of the Committee of the Annual Review, the task of AC/39 was to draft the questionnaire which was circulated around 15 May each year. To this end, the Group met two or three times during the first half of the year to consider proposed modifications to the questionnaire for the current year and to update it.
While the annual review underwent some modifications from one year to the next, overall it changed very little. Over time, the review procedure became very time-consuming and nations began to question its efficiency.
In January 1960, the Council tasked the Steering Group(2) with studying possible modifications to the annual review to make it both simpler and more efficient. The Group’s report proposed that the review should be carried out on a triennial rather than annual basis, but circumstances prevented this proposal from being fully implemented.
From 1963 onwards, the annual/triennal review ceased to be a priority and was eclipsed by the preparations for forming long-term plans. The Group met less and less often. The last meeting at which it worked on the questionnaire for the 1964 annual review was held on 20 March 1964. The 1965 annual review was of a nature and purpose very similar to that of 1964, and the procedures remained unchanged. It was therefore decided that the 1964 questionnaire should be retained for the 1965 annual review with as few modifications as possible (AC/39-D/143).
The last document in this series was issued on 2 December 1966.

The chronological series under the reference CT contains the documents of the Committee of Three on Non-Military Cooperation, also known as the Three Wise Men.Set up by the Council on 5 May 1956 (see C-R(56)23) in order to "advise the Council on ways and means to improve and extend NATO cooperation in non-military fields and to develop greater unity within the Atlantic Community", the Committee comprised three ministers - Mr Halvard Lange, Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Gaetano Martino, Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Mr Lester B. Pearson, Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs. The International Staff provided support for the preparation of their documents and administrative matters.A Committee of Deputies was also established, composed of the Canadian, Italian and Norwegian Permanent Representatives. The chairmanship of the Committee of Deputies was to devolve on the Secretary General or the Deputy Secretary General.The Committee of Three first met from 20 to 22 June 1956 at NATO Headquarters in Paris. It immediately sent out a questionnaire to the NATO nations to establish a basis for the discussion. The questionnaire plan was as follows:I. Political questionsII. Economic questionsIII. Cultural questionsIV. Questions concerning informationV. Organization and functionsThe Committee met again in Paris in September 1956 to consider and analyse the answers to the questionnaire. They also surveyed the development of NATO and other international organizations, NATO's achievements up to that point in the military field, and the political and economic questions which had been dealt with in the past.On the basis of these consultations a draft report to the Council was prepared. A final meeting in New York in November 1956 allowed the Committee to revise the document. The report, which in particular recommended the establishment of committees of political and economic advisers under the Council, was reviewed and approved by the Council in ministerial session on 13 December 1956. With its mission accomplished, the Committee of Three then disbanded.

The AC/146 chronological series contains the records of the Committee on Africa.In November 1958, the Council decided to task a working group made up of the representatives of Germany, Belgium, France, Italy, Portugaland the United Kingdom to assemble, in cooperation with the International Staff, preliminary documentation on the problem of the Soviet penetration of Africa (C-R(58)54). Following this decision, the Secretary General asked the International Staff to produce a document, taking particular account of the terms of reference of the Committee at the level of the Permanent Representatives (C-R(58) 56). At its meeting on 7 January 1959 (C-R(59)1), the Council tasked the International Staff with reworking the text of the first draft (PO/58/1638). On 14 January 1959 (C-R(59)2), it approved the revised version of this draft (PO/58/1638(Revised) and decided that the Committee would hold its first meeting on 19 January 1959.The Committee's terms of reference were spelled out in PO/58/1638 (2nd revise), dated 20 January 1959. This committee, referred to as the Committee on Africa, was instructed to report back to the Council on the methods of Soviet penetration in that part of Africa situated south of the Sahara, on Soviet advances in the region and the measures adopted or proposed to address this threat, and to make suggestions to the Council. The Committee consisted of experts appointed by the following countries: Belgium,France, Italy, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Committee's reports were sent directly to the Council.The Committee on Africa produced its documents under reference AC/146 in 1959-1960. Beginning in 1961, this reference was abandoned. The Committee's work was taken over by the Expert Working Group on Africa, attached to the Political Committee(1).

The AC/23 chronological series contains the records of the Committee on Civil Organization in Time of War (hereinafter referred to as AC/23). In a memorandum dated 6 June 1952 (see C-M(52)27), the Secretary General invited the Council to make plans for the organization of the civil population and for countering a possible Soviet "fifth column" in the NATO countries in the event of war. Consequently, on 11 June 1952, the Council decided to set up a Working Group on Civil Organization in Time of War (see C-R(52)8). It was renamed the Committee on Civil Organization in Time of War after November 1952 (see AC/23-D/17). AC/23 was created to consider and report to the Council on the aspects of civil organization of North Atlantic Treaty countries in time of war that should be studied and how the studies should best be carried out. AC/23 was made up of a representative nominated by each Member state and a chairman (Sir Hoyer Millar) nominated by the Secretary General (see AC/23-N/1). The chairman of the two AC/23 sub-committees, the representative of the Standing Group Liaison Office in London and then in Paris, and a SHAPE representative also attended the meetings. The Secretary General, in a letter dated 30 July 1952, invited each of the Member States to provide information about the measures they had already taken in this area (see C-M(52)101). In the light of the replies, AC/23 chose to address matters of civil defence and refugees separately (see AC/23-R/3). On 29 November 1952, two sub-committees were created for that purpose and answerable to it: the Civil Defence Committee (AC/23(CD)) and the Committee on Refugees and Evacuees (see AC/23-D/25). AC/23 held its last meeting on 2 December 1954 (see AC/23-/13). On 9 November 1955, the Council approved the creation of the Senior Civil Emergency Planning Committee (AC/98 or CEPC) and decided to dissolve the Committee on Civil Organization in Time of War (see C-M(55)100 and C-R(55)50). This was to avoid duplication of effort on coordination, which would henceforth be handled by AC/98. The acronym AC/23 was taken over in April 1956 by the Civil Protection Committee (formerly AC/23(CD)).

The AC/52 chronological series contains the records of the Committee on Information and Cultural Relations.This committee was established on 8 July 1953 by the North Atlantic Council after the latter approved the merger of two working groups - the Working Group on Information Policy(1) and the Working Group on Social and Cultural Co-operation(2) into a single joint working group on cultural co-operation and information policy (C-R(53)34). Its terms of reference were approved on 2 September 1953 (C-R(53)40), at which time it was given the title of the Committee on Information and Cultural Relations (CICR). The CICR reported directly to the Council. It had two functions: information and cultural relations. The CICR worked on information issues with the Information Service, in particular providing its advice on the policy aspect of that Service's activities. On 12 April 1961, the Council approved the disbandment of the Working Group on Psychological Action (AC/186) (C-R(61)12) and decided to task the CICR with its work. A new paragraph was added to the Committee's terms of reference (AC/52-WP(61)28, dated 3 June 1961). The Committee was tasked to "serve as the usual forum for the discussion of day-to-day questions arising in the field of psychological action, as defined in the report of the Working Group on Psychological Action C-M(61)25".The CICR had a range of activities. It reported on Communist anti-Western propaganda in meetings, conferences, assemblies, publications, journals and radio broadcasts on the subject. It even set up an Ad Hoc Study Group on the Communist Offensive in the Youth Field (C-M(61)91 and AC/52-WP(63)2). Another CICR activity was a teaching and research fellowship programme, as well as a summer university course. Among other Committee activities worthy of note are the preparation of events marking NATO anniversaries, participation in conventions, contacts with various organizations such as the College of Europe, UNESCO and others, and studies on relations between the Atlantic Community and the Soviet bloc.This Committee is a standing committee which still operates today(3) .

The AC/52(CE) chronological series contains the documents of the Ad Hoc Meeting of Senior Officers in NATO Countries concerned with Government-Sponsored Cultural Activities.
In April 1956, the Committee on Information and Cultural Relations(1) decided to organize a conference of experts on cultural matters in the NATO countries with a view to providing fresh impetus to the cultural programme. This proposal was approved by the Council at its ministerial session in May 1956, and the meeting of senior officials took place on 10-12 July 1956. The participants concluded the discussions by recommending various actions (AC/52-D/178), some of which had already been initiated (e.g.: study/research fellowships; summer courses) with the others remaining to be designed or set up (e.g.: translation of Soviet scientific publications; extension of exchanges to the heads of union groups and youth movements; meeting of an Atlantic Round Table, etc). In September 1956, all of these proposals were reviewed by the Committee, with the goal being to consider how to act on them (AC/52-R/60 and AC/52 R/61).
This conference was a one-time event, as had been originally decided. It led to the implementation of new actions.

The AC/52(SP) chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on the Greek Delegation's Proposal.
This working group was established in May 1958 further to a proposal from Greece aimed at creating a study committee on Soviet propaganda. It met for the first time on 22 May 1958. At the four meetings of the Group, it became abundantly clear that NATO felt it was ill-informed of the use to which each member country was putting the information sent to them. The Group proposed sending a questionnaire on the subject to each member country.
The replies received were discussed at the fifth conference of the Heads of National Services in October 1958 (see the Working Group's final report, circulated under reference AC/52 D(58)52 on 31 October 1958).

The AC/274 chronological series contains the records of the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (CCMS). The CCMS is a standing committee established by the North Atlantic Council on 24 November 1969 (see C-R(69)49). The initial terms of reference from 17/11/1969 (AC/274-D/1) were revised on 01/08/2000. It reports on its activities to the Council annually (AC/274-D/1).The CCMS was one of the three scientific committees created by NATO in the 1950s and 1960s. The Committee worked in line with Article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which states that "the Parties will promote conditions of stability and well-being". It was a forum for the exchange of knowledge and experience on technical, scientific and environmental aspects of the social and environmental issues in both the civilian and military sectors in NATO countries. After 2000, its network was expanded to the Partner countries, and its activities were reoriented more toward the problems that could jeopardize peace and stability.The CCMS was chaired by the Assistant Secretary General of the division responsible for scientific and environmental affairs. Each participating country could determine the make-up of its participation. The committee was assisted, as required, by the relevant divisions of the International Staff (AC/274-D/1).The fundamental role of the CCMS was to supervise NATO's Environment and Society Programme, created on 28 January 1970 (C-R(70)5). The CCMS met twice a year to review general policy, discuss the various parts of the programme, discuss work under way and propose new work, and forward its annual report to the Council (AC/274-D/110). Member countries had to inform the Council and the Committee of steps taken to apply CCMS recommendations (AC/274-D/39).The staff officer for the topics of study was the contact person on the International Staff. Under the authority of the Assistant Secretary General, the staff officer was responsible for the coordination, the running and the centralization of the entire programme. The Staff Officer prepared the meetings of the Committee, its panels and its working groups, liaised with the other science organizations (including the SCOM) and oversaw the CCMS public relations policy (BC-D(70)11).Throughout its existence, there were four parts to the programme: the pilot study, the ad hoc short-term project, the workshop or seminar, and the research fellowship. The pilot study created on 28 January 1970 (C-R(70)5) was by far the most important. Pilot studies lasted several years (usually three to five). The results were available to everyone. The topic of the pilot study could be suggested by a Member country or by the Committee itself (AC/274-WP/2). Research focused on environmental or societal issues, including pollution, noise, urban problems, energy, health and defence-related environmental problems.Starting in 1970, it was mandatory for a final report to be drafted, but it was only in 1974 that the procedure was clearly and definitively established (AC/274-D/39-REV2).The pilot study had to involve at least five partners of which two had to be Member countries after 1997. It was funded by the lead nation and the co-leads (AC/274-D/2). The pilot study could be punctuated by annual workshops or international conferences held in each participating country in turn. During the 1990s, problems emerged that led to a progressive decline in the programme: the portion of participants from Member countries decreased, some partner countries had hesitations, or there was overlap between the activities of the Science Committee (SCOM) and the CCMS.The proposed solution was a merger of the two committees into a single Science for Peace and Security Committee (SPS or AC/328). This merger, which entered into force on 28 June 2006, marked the end of the CCMS and its NATO's Environment and Society Programme.

The AC/290 chronological series contains the records of the Committee on the Implementation of the NATO Alert System.This committee was established to ensure that the alert system functioned properly. Its role is presented in AC/290-N(73)1, but its terms of reference were not clearly defined until 1975 when the tasks assigned to the Committee that it was already carrying out were put into writing. The first Committee meeting was held on 8 August 1973. In 1974, it planned exercise HILEX 6 and participated in the work of other committees such as the Senior Civil Emergency Planning Committee.

The AC/21 chronological series contains the records of the Committee to Examine the EDC Treaty.This Committee was created by a Council decision on 13 May 1952 (see C-M(52)3) to carry out the verification work on the Treaty Establishing the European Defence Community (EDC). It had to secure military experts’ support for examining the military aspects of the treaty.The Committee was comprised of national representatives and the Standing Group’s Liaison Officer or a member of his staff. It was chaired by Mr Fenoaltea and met four times in the 16–26 May 1952 period. On 26 May, the Committee submitted a report to the Council (see C-M(52)20) inviting the countries to sign the treaty.Once its mission had been accomplished, the Committee to Examine the EDC Treaty was disbanded.

The AC/20 chronological series contains the records of the Committee on the Financing of Additional Aircraft Production.The Committee was created by the North Atlantic Council on 13 May 1952 to discuss the financing of additional aircraft production and to consider ways and means of activating the additional production of aircraft; the Working Group would then submit a report to the Council. The meetings of the Committee were chaired by Mr. R. Sergent, Assistant Secretary General for Economic Affairs, and were attended by representatives of Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the United States, the International Staff and the Standing Group. The Committee held its first meeting on 16 May 1952 and its last meeting was held on 30 May 1952.

International Military Staff Memorandum - Communications and Electronics Division

The AC/124 chronological series contains the records of the Conference of National Information Officers. The first Conference of National Information Officers was held in 1951, the second in 1953 and the third in 1955(1) .The AC/124 series contains the records of the Conferences of National Information Officers from 1957 onward. The aim of these conferences was to review the Member countries’ information distribution efforts. We have no terms of reference per se for these conferences, which followed up on three others. The records from the first conference include the recommendations of the North Atlantic Council Deputies, which had proposed a meeting of senior information officers in order to establish close co-operation between the Member countries’ information services in the framework of ideological warfare (see D-D(51)62, D-R(51)13 and D-R(51)14).

The first document was created by the Standing Group and after all were created by C3S

Between 1949 and 1963, the Standing Group (hereinafter referred to as SG) was made up of the French, British and US representatives, who acted as Chairman on a rotating annual basis. The SG met regularly, once a week. The Chairman was assisted by a Director in the performance of his duties and the effective implementation of day-to-day work. (See SGM-1702-SG, page 6, SG organization).Following a reshuffle which was approved in 1963 and became effective in 1964, all the subordinate groups of the SG were opened up to the other NATO member nations (see MC 2/2-final and MCM-114-63). From that point on, each subordinate group was chaired for 2 or 3 years by one nation (preferably not France, the US or the UK).The SG and all its subordinate groups (including the secretariat) were abolished in July 1966, after France decided to withdraw from the integrated military structure (see MCM-90-66(REV) and GF(66)D-27).

The DC Subject Files encompass decisions, reports and proposals on a variety of Defence related topics, such as the establishment of Military Committee and the Military Representatives Committee, activities of the Standing Group, such as the creation of the Military Standardization Agency, establishment of the Ocean Shipping Planning Board, reports from the Military Production and Supply Board, Strategic Planning proposals, reorganization documents, association of Greece and Turkey.

This chronological Series contains the memoranda of the Defence Committee.The memoranda were usually directed for the subsidiary committees, such as the Military Committee, the Standing Group or the Military Production and Supply Board, or as recommendations to the North Atlantic Council or the Council Deputies.

The DC chronological Fonds contains the records of the Defence Committee.In accordance with Article 9 of the North Atlantic Treaty and the guidance given by the working group on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, at its first session in 1949 the Council established a Defence Committee (C1-D-1/1, C1-D-1/2).The terms of reference, established at the first Council session, laid down a number of points. The Committee was made up of Defence Ministers or their representatives from each signatory State. The Chair was held for an ordinary annual session by the signatory states in turn, in their English alphabetical order, starting with the United States. The Committee met each year, normally behind closed doors, in an ordinary session convened by the Chair. The venue of the meeting was fixed by the Chair after consulting Committee members. Additional meetings could be held at the express request of the Council or of a majority of Committee members (C1-D-1/2).The Committee's task was to prepare unified defence plans for the North Atlantic region (C1-D-1/2).The Committee was aided by subsidiary military bodies set up during the first two Council sessions:- the Military Committee(1), which was directly subordinate to the Defence Committee;-the Standing Group(2), a sub-committee of the Military Committee;-the five strategic regional groups (the Northern European Regional Planning Group, Western European Regional Planning Group, Southern European-Western Mediterranean Regional Planning Group, Canadian-United States Regional Planning Group and the North Atlantic Ocean Regional Planning Group);-the Military Production and Supply Board(3), also subordinate to the Defence Committee (C1-D-1/2,C2-D-1/5).The Defence Committee took importance decisions for the development of NATO’s structure. In 1949 it proposed a strategic concept for the integrated defence of the North Atlantic area, and the methods of working out a programme for the production and supply of arms and equipment. In 1950 it approved a four-year medium-term defence plan. Following the communist attack on South Korea, also in 1950, at the Council's request the Defence Committee made plans for the creation of a powerful integrated European force under centralized command(4). The Committee started operating on 4 October 1949, and was abolished as a separate ministerial body of the Council when the latter was reorganized on 3 May 1951 (D-D(51)86 (Final)).

The FEC chronological series contains the records of the Defence Financial and Economic Committee.During its first session on 17th September 1949 the Council Deputies recognized in directive D-1/3 the importance of economic and financial factors in the development and implementation of military plans for the defence of the North Atlantic Area. Consequently the Council Deputies agreed that a working group should be created which would submit recommendations to the Council on the appropriate machinery to deal with these matters.The Defence Financial and Economic Committee (DFEC) was established on 18th November 1949 during the second session of Council Deputies. The directive D-1/4 to the Defence Financial and Economic Committee set up the composition of the Committee consisting in one member at ministerial level (Finance Ministers) for every signatory country and stipulated that the new body would report directly to the Council. The United States Representative Averell Harriman was elected the first chairman. The FEC met for the first time in Paris on 19th December 1949.The DFEC was created to develop financial and economic guides for collective defence programmes in co-operation with the Military Committee (including the Standing Group) and the Military Production and Supply Board. It was in charge of considering the financial and economic impact (availability of raw materials, capital equipment and manpower), recommending arrangements for interchange of military equipment, measuring the foreign exchange costs and considering plans for the mobilisation of economic and financial resources in times of emergency.The Committee worked on four projects: collecting data on current defence expenditures by country, studying the availability of financial and economic resources for military production, examining financial arrangements for military material transfers and developing formulae and criteria for measuring economic burden of defence.The DFEC disappeared as a result of the modification of NATO‘s structure by a decision of the Council Deputies on 3rd May 1951 (see D-D(51)86 Final). The functions and responsibilities were transferred to the Financial and Economic Board (FEB). The DFEC’s work provided Deputies with statistical information on budgetary resources (data collection for defence expenditures) and with an uncompleted study on the removal of custom barriers for the exchange of war material (see FEB-R(51)1-PART 2).

The AC/100 chronological series contains the records on the Defence Planning Multilateral Discussions.
These discussions took place in a context of growing tension and threat to the NATO countries. These threats were due, firstly, to the modernization of armaments and the spread of nuclear weapons and, secondly, to new political factors such as the creation of the Warsaw Pact and the change in the USSR’s stance on the reunification of Germany.
In November 1955, the International Staff expressed the desire to set out a procedure for adjusting defence planning (see C-M(55)113). This was accomplished through the draft Council resolution of 6 December 1955 (see C-M(55)120), which suggested defence planning discussions as
a way of making as much information about the defence problems as possible available to all the countries and fostering collective exchanges of views on those problems. It also made provision for discussions that brought together the civil and military representatives of the Member governments, the NATO military authorities and the International Staff. This resolution was adopted by the Council at its meeting on 15 December 1955 (see C-R(55)59).
At the first Council meeting of 1956 (C-R(56)1), the Secretary General of the Organization, Lord Ismay, said that the aim of the discussions would be to enable each NATO country to have authoritative advice on the new defence planning structure.
The meetings, held on 20-26 February 1956, were chaired by Lord Ismay. Their mission was to provide information rather than produce decisions, and took the form of briefings(1) by the military authorities followed by discussions(2). There were no further discussions of this kind after that point.
Working groups were formed, two of which produced documents. The first had been set up to review the divisional organization of the land forces (see AC/100(WG-1)R/1 and AC/100(WG-1)VR/1). The second was tasked with reviewing the forward scatter system (see AC/100(WG-2)D/1 and AC/100(WG-2)WP/1 and 2).

The DPC chronological series contains the records of the Defence Planning Committee (DPC).The Defence Planning Committee is the principal decision-making authority on matters relating to NATO’s integrated military structure. The DPC is chaired by the Secretary General and includes representatives from all member nations that belong to NATO’s integrated military structure. The DPC implements decisions taken by the participating nations for collective defence planning, and approves Force Goals and Ministerial Guidance for future NATO defence planning.The DPC’s origins lie in the final May 1963 Communiqué issued at a meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Ministerial Session in Ottawa. The so-called "Ottawa Communiqué" outlined the challenges NATO faced from an increasingly complex international political and military situation. Ministers were especially concerned about the need for a balance between the Alliance’s conventional and nuclear capabilities and so they directed the Council to review the inter-related issues of strategy, force requirements, and available resources (see C-R(63)56). At the end of September 1963, NATO military authorities were told to develop a strategic plan, while nations were asked to report on available resources. It was also decided that the North Atlantic Council would constitute itself as a Defence Planning Committee to direct and supervise the Review. As a result, the DPC met for the first time on 10th October 1963, when it established a subordinate, advisory Defence Planning Working Group composed of nations with an interest in planning(1). The DPC made its first report to Council in December 1965, in response to a request for a five year force goals plan. In that same month, Council also decided to base defence planning on a five year cycle, complemented by yearly and triennial reviews (see C-M(65)138 and C-M(65)139).When France withdrew from NATO’s integrated military structure in 1966, the Council extended the DPC’s mandate beyond strictly military planning to include all integrated matters and all matters concerning bodies in which France no longer participated.

The DPQ chronological series contains the Defence Planning Review Questionnaires. For the first attempts to reconcile the military requirements of NATO and the economic and financial resources of the member states, refer to the chronological series of the Annual Review Committee(1), and the series entitled Annual Review(2) for 1952-1967. Analysis of the Alliance's military situation from 1959 to 1965 showed that, from one year to another, Western defence arrangements remained in many respects inadequate to protect the Member Nations from the growing Soviet power. By bringing existing deficiencies to light, the Annual Defence Review contributed to establishing realistic long-term plans. With the Council's December 1965 resolution on defence planning, ministers accepted the principle of a procedure to be implemented from January 1967. This involved the annual reviewing of five-year defence plans, with the first period running from 1968 to 1972. Under the new procedure, instead of studying each country separately as the Annual Review Committee had done, the Defence Planning Working Group considered defence problems horizontally, looking at a series of problems which were of major concern to the whole Alliance.In September 1967, the Defence Review Committee(3) replaced the Defence Planning Working Group(4) and also took over the tasks of the Annual Review Committee(5). Work on the DPQ, in cooperation with the Defence Planning Committee(6) , has become one of the DRC's main tasks.On 17 July 1967, the first questionnaire was finalized under the title "Questionnaire for the 1967 Defence Planning Review (Approved Information Request No.), Long-Term Defence Planning". Once it had been adopted, the questionnaire was distributed to member nations.After the Table of Contents, the Preface, the Administrative Instructions and the Directive for the Memorandum, the questionnaire has the following subdivisions: - Item I: Memorandum - Item IIA: Army Section: Table I (normal distribution) - Item IIB: Army Section: all other tables, including all annexes (special distribution) - Item IIIA: Navy Section: Table I (normal distribution) - Item IIIB: Navy Section: all other tables, including all annexes (special distribution) - Item IVA: Air Force Section: Table I (normal distribution) - Item IVB: Air Force Section: all other tables, including all annexes (special distribution) - Item V: Financial and Economic SectionEach year, the questionnaire took the same general form, by and large. Changes were made to it over the years (more or less major changes to tables, annexes and addenda) and certain items were deleted.. Today, the Defence Planning Questionnaire still retains all its importance as the main means of coordinating member states' defence efforts.

The DPWG chronological series contains documents on the Defence Planning Working Group.The Defence Planning Working Group (DPWG) sprang from the decision taken by the Council on 2 October 1963 regarding the establishment of NATO force plans (C-M(63)74). In the same document, the Council agreed to constitute itself as the Defence Planning Committee.The DPWG comprised representantives of those nations who wished to be involved, together with representatives of the International Staff, the Standing Group, the Military Committee and the Major NATO Commanders. At its first meeting on 10 October 1963, the Defence Planning Committee drew up "Draft Initial Instructions to the Defence Planning Working Group" (DPC-D(63)2). The Group was then able to start work. Its role was to assist the Defence Planning Committee in implementing C-M(63)74. It was authorized to take initiatives to fill any gaps which might become apparent in the procedure as work progressed. Its work schedule involved close cooperation with the NATO military authorities so as to be able to provide, at any time, information needed on the resources likely to be allocated to the defence effort. The DPWG was tasked with ensuring that all necessary preparatory studies were made. It provided the Defence Planning Committee with the information it required and drew up draft reports which were used by the Committee for its reports to ministers. The DPWG set up the following study groups and specialized sub-groups which were tasked with assisting it in its work: - Economic Sub-Group of the Defence Planning Working Group (1965), under reference DPWG(ECO); - Restricted Sub-Group on Main Issues (1965), under reference DPWG(SG); - South-East Sub-Group (1965), under reference DPWG(SE); - Northern Sub-Group (1965), under reference DPWG(NORTH); - Ad Hoc Working Group on Mobilization or Force Expansion Plans and Potential (1966-67), under reference DPWG(MOB); - Ad Hoc Working Group on the Implications of Various Assumptions Concerning Strategic Warning (1966), under reference DPWG(STRAT WNG).The DPWG discontinued its activities following the withdrawal of France from the Alliance’s integrated military structure in 1966 and the subsequent reorganization of the NATO committee system. From 1 September 1967, the DPWG was replaced by the Defence Review Committee(1) .

The DPB chronological series contains the records of the Defence Production Board.In November 1950 the Production Experts to the Working Group on Production and Finance recommended to establish a Defence Production Board (see D-D/168). On 11th December 1950 the Council Deputies approved the Draft Terms of Reference for the North Atlantic Defence Production Board (See D-D/205). The DPB should meet in London and would be constituted by one member per country plus a Coordinator. The objectives of the DPB were mainly to achieve the maximum production of military equipment in the most efficient manner, at the least cost and the shortest time to meet the military requirements by coordinating national production programmes. Among DPB’s tasks were: to keep military production and availability under constant review, increase military supplies where they fall short and to consider the eligibility of major production projects for external aid applicable to military production, examine problems of obtaining materials, propose new production facilities, recommend measures to improve production and distribution and facilitate the exchange of patents.The 1st Meeting was held on 11 January 1951 (see DPB(51)M-1) and established a working party for the transfer and assumption of Military Production and Supply Board (MPSB) tasks, responsibilities and staff to the DPB. During this first meeting the Belgian Member Henri Janne was elected Chairman. On 15th January Mr. William R. Herod was appointed Coordinator for the DPB (see DPB (51)02). Following this appointment the MPSB was dissolved (see DPB(51)05) and its functions were assumed by the DPB (see DPB(51)6). The MPSB Permanent Working Staff activities were continued by the DPB interim organization. These activities, as reviewed in DPB(51)17 were: Production and Programmes, Equipment Requirements and Availabilities, Surpluses (Redistribution of existing stocks of military interest), Materials, Industrial Mobilization Planning, Customs barriers, Standardization and Production equipment.The following divisions were created within the DPB: Production and Programs Division (leading the allocation of production tasks and developing combined production programs), Analysis Division, Legal Division, Economic and Finance Division, Specialties Division and a Secretariat and Administrative Division.MPSB End Item Task Forces reviews were continued under the auspices of the Defence Production Board. A formulaire was delivered to member countries to collect data on defence expenditure planned for the period 1951-1954 so that the DPB could have an up-to-date picture of the current situation. Data on Aircraft, artillery, ammunition, electronics, combat vehicles, small arms, engineering equipment, transport vehicles and ships expenditures was to be collected (see DPB(51)11).The DPB produced the first Report to the Council Deputies in August 1951 (see DPB(51)77(Revised)) emphasizing the planning of additional production to meet the time-phased requirements up to July 1954. This report was presented to the North Atlantic Council in Ottawa (September 1951) where a Temporary Council Committee was set up to reconcile military requirements as a whole with real NATO Countries capabilities for undertaking defence.Due to the reorganisation of NATO and its installation in Paris (1952) the DPB was disestablished. After the move to Paris, the Production Division of the International Staff, under the Assistant Secretary General for Production and Logistics took over the activities of the previous production agencies.

The Defence Review Committee (DRC), the senior advisory committee to the Defence Planning Committee(1) (DPC), came into being as a result of the re-organization of defence planning following France’s withdrawal in 1966 from the integrated military structure and the subsequent transfer of responsibility for all defence planning aspects of the Alliance from the Council to the DPC.Because of circumstances at the time, the DRC was established without official terms of reference. As of 1 September 1967 the DRC replaced the Defence Planning Working Group(2); it also took over the functions of the Committee of the Annual Review(3). The main activities of the DRC consisted in the preparation of Ministerial Guidance, the Force Goal process, the Defence Review and work related to the exchange of force planning data. The original membership included those nations taking part in the integrated defence structure; the Military authorities were also represented in the committee and the Assistant Secretary General for Defence Planning chaired the meetings. In 1974 Greece suspended its participation in the work of the DRC following its withdrawal from the military structure. It resumed participation in 1980 when it rejoined NATO’s integrated military structure. The following working groups and sub-groups were established under the authority of the DRC: - DRC(GK LF) 1968 -1970 Sub-Group on the Means of Strengthening Greek Local Forces - DRC(TK LF) 1968 -1970 Sub-Group on the Means of Strengthening Turkish Local Forces - DRC(DRWG) 1971-1973 Open-Ended Working Group on Defence Planning Data Requirements and Reporting Procedures and Methods - DRC(WR) 1972-1974 Standing Sub-Group on War Reserve Stocks.

The Standing Group (hereinafter referred to as the SG) had an internal structure of technical and consultative committees (see SGM-1702-53). The International Planning Team (IPT) was one of these. Under its terms of reference, established on 11 March 1957 (SGWM-175-57), the IPT consisted of three national teams, one for each nation represented in the SG (France, the United Kingdom and the United States). Each national team was in turn divided into three cells. The functions of each cell were determined by their nation. Their field of activity was always the same. The IPT's mission was to study and present proposals to the SG on a wide range of military issues (strategy, defence planning, force assessment, yearly review, training) and also administrative issues (organization of SG agencies, personnel management, etc).The IPT worked under the instructions of the SG (communicated by the SG secretariat in the form of a directive). This directive was first discussed by the secretariat and the delegations of the three IPT nations. It was then passed to one of these nations. The subject of study could be dealt with permanently or on a case-by-case basis. When appropriate, the IPT could consult the Military Representatives Committee (MRC) and work together with other technical or consultative committees of the SG. The IPT could suggest a new subject of study to the Steering Committee or the Standing Group. It reported to the SG and also kept the SG secretariat and the MRC informed. It met at the level of national representatives about once a week, usually at the SG headquarters. IPT meetings were attended by the Chairman (French, British or American by turns), three representatives (one for each IPT nation), military personnel invited for the specific subject under discussion (often from the MRC) and the IPT Secretary. Following reorganization, approved in 1963 and implemented in 1964, apart from the Standing Group and its three working teams, all the subordinate groups (including the IPT) were opened up to the other NATO member nations (see MC 2/2-final and MCM-114-63). The Standing Group and all its subordinate groups (including the IPT) were abolished in July 1966 after France decided to leave the integrated military structure (see MCM-90-66(REV) and GF(66)D-27).

Personal business letters from the Director, IMS

Standing Group Memorandum

The G chronological series contains the documents on German Defence Contribution of the Executive Bureau of the Temporary Council Committee (TCC). In October 1951 the Temporary Council Committee circulated among member nations a couple of questionnaires to objectively analyze the military situation of the Alliance (see TCC-D/5-ADD1 and TCC-D/6). At the same time an Executive Bureau (EB) responsible for carrying out the analytical work, known as the "Committee of Three Wise Men", was set up within the Temporary Council Committee. Consequently, the Allied High Commission for Germany produced a report on the War Potential of Western Germany following the lines suggested in the questionnaires to member nations (see TCC-REPLY GE). On 1 February 1952 the Allied High Commission asked the EB to examine the capacity of the Federal Republic of Germany to contribute to the common defence in 1952/1953 (see TCC-D/26 ). West Germany was asked to produce a survey and study on its public budget as a basis for the initiation of negotiations on the amount and composition of the future German defence contribution (see G-1). Statistical data on German expenditure was analysed by the EB (see G-2 to G-6) and several memoranda were issued by the German Government related to the German contribution (see G-12 and G-14). After analysing this data, the EB produced a report on Germany’s contribution to Defence 1952/1953 (see G-13-REV2 and G-17 (not found)).

The Standing Group (hereinafter referred to as the SG) consisted of the French, British and US representatives, who acted as Chairman on an annual rotating basis (until 1964) and then for 2 years + 1. The SG met regularly, once a week. The Chairman was assisted by a Director in the performance of his duties and the effective implementation of day-to-day work. The SG Director chaired the meetings of his team and some meetings of the SG Steering Committee. The SG Secretary sometimes served as Deputy Director, but one person could also fill both posts (see SGM-1702-53, page 6, SG organization).The SG Director supervised the following bodies, among others:-three International Working Teams (IWT) of the SG: France, the United Kingdom and the United States (see SGM-1702-53). The IWTs dealt with specific issues and reported to the SG Director via his secretariat (see below). The working groups carried out most of the SG's work; -a secretariat which managed the administrative work of the SG and the three working teams. It advised on security procedures in the SG structure, managed the budgets and liaised with other NATO bodies. The secretariat was based in Washington DC, as was the SG headquarters (see SG-228-Final); -three International Planning Teams (IPT);-the Military Committee (MC); -the Military Representatives Committee (MRC).The SG Director ensured that the following work was duly performed: -preparation of MC and SG meetings (arranging the room, agendas, proposed actions) -production of decision sheets (rough drafts and final versions) -organization of travel for any member of an SG body-establishment of a NATO security policy and taking account of inspection reports on this subject-creation of COSMIC registries and security posts -sharing of information between the SG, NATO commands and the WEU-drawing up terms of reference for each SG body-opening up the SG's subordinate groups (including the secretariat) to the other NATO member nations in the framework of the 1963 reform-occasional reorganizations of the SG structure Following the creation of the International Staff in 1952, the SG secretariat merged with the SG Director's office and the Secretary was given the title of Deputy Director (see DSGM-222-52). The SG Director was henceforth responsible for supervising and coordinating the work of the International Planning Staff under his management (see SSGM-124-64). The SG and all its subordinate groups (including the secretariat) were abolished in July 1966 after France decided to withdraw from the integrated military structure (see MCM-90-66(REV) and GF(66)D-27).

The AC/127 chronological series contains the records of the Economic Committee. This committee was set up in January 1957 by the Council, pursuant to the recommendation of the Committee of Three(1), with a view to promoting cooperation between NATO member nations. Its terms of reference, defined on 23 January 1957, were finally adopted on 14 February, 1957. They appear in Annex A to C-R(57)4, and stipulate that the Committee of Economic Advisers(2), set up under the authority of the Council, "will consist of representatives from all member nations. They could normally be the officials mainly concerned with the work of other international economic organizations". This Committee was tasked to "study and report to the Council on economic issues of special interest to the Alliance, particularly those which have political or defence implications or affect the economic health of the Atlantic Community as a whole. Such studies or preparatory work may be assigned to it by the Council or authorised by the Council at the request of the Secretary General or of the Committee itself." The Committee of Economic Advisers was assigned the tasks which were previously those of the Committee of Technical Advisers after the disbandment of that group(3) . The Committee of Economic Advisers met for the first time on 28 March 1957, chaired by the Assistant Secretary General for Economics and Finance. Its first task was to more closely define the scope of its work and develop a Programme of Work. In April 1958, the Council agreed that the Committee on Soviet Economic Policy would act as a Sub-Committee(4) under the general direction of the Committee of Economic Advisers (C-M(58)61 and C-R(58)28). In February 1970, the Committee re-examined its activities with a view to simplifying its procedures and concentrating its efforts on activities corresponding most closely to the needs of the Council and delegations and came to the conclusion that "there is no need to modify the terms of this mandate which appear sufficiently flexible"(C-M(70)2. Within the scope of the mandate, a distinction was identified between two main tasks: - to supply, as required, the Council with economic assessments and advice either on current policy issues or on more general problems; - to establish a pool of economic data with a view to providing a common interpretation of the situation for the use of national delegations. At its meeting on 25 February 1970 (C-R(70)8), the Council agreed that "the report C-M(70)2 should serve as a guide for the Committee's future activities" and that in English the Committee would be called "Economic Committee" (C-R(70)8). The Economic Committee is a standing committee which still sits today.

The AC/127(O) chronological series contains the records of the Ad Hoc Study Group on Soviet Oil Policy.
This study group was set up by the Council in November 1960. Comprising experts appointed by the government, it was tasked to study current and future oil export trends in the Soviet bloc, ascertain the consequences of these exports, define the principles on which the member states could base their policy in the face of increasing Soviet oil exports, taking into account their probable repercussions on the free world, and report back to the Economic Committee.
The Ad Hoc Study Group on Soviet Oil Policy met for the first time on 9 December 1960. It submitted its final report to the Economic Committee on 23 May, 1961.

The AC/127(EWT) chronological series contains the Economic Committee’s records on trade agreements. The first record is a note from France on 28 July 1961. The last record in this series was submitted by the Turkish Delegation on 19 April 1977(1).

The AC/127(NEC) chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on the Ex Post Facto Notification of Officially-backed Export Credits of over Five Years to Communist Countries.
This working group was set up in February 1964 to develop rules on how to handle the exchange of information on the backing of credits of over five years to communist countries. Made up of representatives from the member nations, it produced a report dated 21 October 1964 in which it recommended that all officially-backed credits for a duration greater than five years beginning 31 December 1962 should be the subject of an exchange of information. The Economic Committee approved the report, and decided that these information exchanges would take place. In January 1965, the Economic Committee announced that ex post facto notifications by the member nations of credits of over five years would be notified under a new Economic Committee series bearing the reference AC/127 (NEC).
The last document in this series was submitted by Germany on 15 April 1986.

A Summary Record of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (RECORD-MC/CS)

The EB chronological series contains the records of the Executive Board of the Temporary Council Committee.The Executive Board, also referred to as the "Committee of Three Wise Men", was set up, further to Council Resolution C7-D/19, by a decision of the Temporary Council Committee(1) (TCC-D/1(Final)). It comprised the Chairman of the Temporary Committee and its two Vice-Chairmen at least, i.e. Mr. Averell Harriman (United States), Mr. Jean Monnet (France) and Sir Edwin Plowden (United Kingdom). If its work so required, it could request information or assistance from the member governments or from NATO civilian and military bodies.The task of the Executive Board was to prepare the Committee's work and proposals of a general nature regarding the way ahead and concluding notes, and to review the responses to the questionnaires circulated by the Committee.The Executive Board was disbanded at the same time as the Temporary Council Committee.

Subjects under consideration by the Military Representatives.

The RDC chronological series contains the records of Lord Coleridge (Richard Duke Coleridge), the first Executive Secretary of the North Atlantic Council (1952 - 1970). The post of Executive Secretary was created following the 1952 reorganization of NATO and the creation of the post of Secretary General. The Executive Secretary, under the direction of the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General directed the work of the Office of the Secretary General and coordinated the general activity of the international staff; he acted as secretary to the Council and was responsible to the Secretary General for programming its work and for seeing that actions were initiated on decisions of the Council; he was responsible for supervising the work of the secretaries of the committees of the Council; on those aspects of the work of the Organization which were not the direct responsibility of one Assistant Secretary General, the Executive Secretary maintained at the appropriate level, liaison with delegations and with the Office of the Standing Group Liaison Officer.In 1956, a reorganisation of the Executive Secretariat led to the transfer of responsibilities of personnel management, conference services, recruitment which came under the direction of a new Director of Administration. From 1957 to 1967, the Executive Secretariat was given the responsibility of supervising civil emergency planning and between 1966 and 1970 it was also in charge of crisis management and communications.Lord Coleridge was succeeded by his Deputy, Mr. K.W. Andreae (KWA) on 1 August 1970.

Created on 1 January 1971, the series EXS contains the memoranda of the Executive Secretary(1). The Executive Secretary, under the direction of the Secretary General and the Deputy Secretary General, directed the work of the Office of the Secretary General and coordinated the general activity of the International Staff; he acted as Secretary of the Council and was responsible to the Secretary General for programming its work and for seeing that actions were initiated on decisions of the Council. He was responsible for supervising secretaries of the committees of the Council. On those aspects of the work of the Organization which were not the direct responsibility of one Assistant Secretary General, the Executive Secretary maintained liaison with delegations at the appropriate level and with the Office of the Standing Group Liaison Officer.In 1956, a reorganisation of the Executive Secretariat led to the transfer of responsibilities of personnel management, conference services and recruitment, which came under the direction of a new Director of Administration. From 1957 to 1967, the Executive Secretariat was given the responsibility of supervising civil emergency planning and between 1966 and 1970 it was also in charge of crisis management and communications.The post of Executive Secretary disappeared with the restructuring of the International Staff in 2003 and the establishment of the Council Secretariat within the newly created Executive Management Division(2). Executive Secretaries for the period 1971-2003 were as follows:Mr. Kurt W. Andreae (1970-1973), Mr. George E. Sekeris (1973-1978), Mr. Tugay Ozceri (1979-1988), Mr. Christopher Prebensen (1988-1993) and Mr. Leo Verbruggen (1993-2003).

The AC/281 chronological series contains the documents of the Executive Working Group on the Study of Alliance Defence Problems for the 1970s. The Executive Working Group was set up to assist the Defence Planning Committee with the AD 70 study, a detailed review of the Alliance's defence problems for the 1970s. In the spring of 1970 the Council entrusted the Executive Working Group with examining, developing and refining the texts which it had itself commissioned from NATO committees and agencies or from nations, in order to submit a full report to the Defence Planning Committee in permanent session by the end of the year with the agreement of the Military Committee. It was chaired by the Deputy Secretary General and made up of senior officials, members of the International Staff and the International Military Staff, and independenor government experts as the occasion demanded, and had a supporting staff and secretariat (see PO(70)23 and AC/281 WP(71)1). At the end of the year the Defence Planning Committee in permanent session decided to keep the Executive Working Group in existence, to establish and ratify the programme of work, and then monitor the implementation of the findings of the AD 70 Study and report periodically to the DPC (see DPC-R(70)21, AC/281 WP(71)1 and AC/281-N(71)1).As authorized by its terms of reference, the Executive Working Group set up subordinate bodies, such as: - the East-West Balance Sub-Group (AC/281(SG/1)) - the Strategy and Force Levels Sub-Group (AC/281(SG/2)) - the Resources and Burden Sharing Sub-Group (AC/281(SG/3)) - and the Public Presentation Sub-Group (AC/281(SG/4)) all four of which were formed in 1970, as well as the Sub-Group on Ways and Means of Implementing the AD 70 Measures for the Strengthening of Greek and Turkish Local Forces (AC/281(LF)) and the Ad Hoc Working Group on Data Requirements for a Functional and Regional Analysis of Defence Expenditures (AC/281(DR)), both of which were set up in 1973. The Executive Working Group itself, which met for the first time on 15 June 1970, is still active today.

The AC/36(M) chronological series contains the records of the Expert Working Group on Manpower. The Expert Working Group on Manpower had been part of the Working Group on Labour Mobility(1) since January 1953, so its documents were originally incorporated into the AC/36 document series. It was only after mid-January 1955 that the two entities were clearly differentiated by separating their documents. The documents of the Expert Working Group on Manpower were given the reference AC/36(M). On 2 May 1956, the Senior Civil Emergency Planning Committee (SCEPC) informed the Council of its decision to rename the Expert Working Group on Manpower the "Manpower Planning Committee" (see AC/36(M)-D/14) without changing its responsibilities The Working Group co-operated closely and regularly exchanged reports with the SCEPC. The Working Group’s task was to examine the problems associated with calling up reservists in a crisis, the issue of scientific manpower and the registration of critical medical staff. The Working Group continued its work after 1964.

The FEB chronological series contains the record of the Financial and Economic Board (FEB).On 30th April 1951 the Council Deputies approved the establishment of a Financial and Economic Board for NATO with terms of reference set out in the Resolution included in D-D(51)98 (circulated after amendments as D-D(51)121 by the Special Working Group on the Establishment of Financial and Economic Board (AC/3). The Board was composed of a senior official from each member country.The Board was created in Paris to enable an effective use of the experience and skilled personnel of OEEC (Organization for the European Economic Coordination) and to bring together in one body the responsibility for certain economic and financial tasks previously carried out by the Economic and Financial Working Group, the Permanent Working Staff of the DFEC (Defence Financial and Economic Committee) and the Advisory Group on Raw Materials. The FEB reported directly to the Council Deputies and worked closely with the Defence Production Board on the economical and financial aspects of defence programmes.The first meeting took place on 22nd May 1951 and the French Representative Thierry de Clermont-Tonnerre was elected interim chairman (see FEB-R(51)5). Over the next meetings, the Board analyzed the questionnaire submitted by member countries as asked by the former Economic and Financial Working Group (see FE(P)D(51)7-REV2). The purpose of this questionnaire was to compile economic national indicators related to defence expenditure. The examination of national submissions led to a report on equitable distribution of the defence burden on 20th August 1951 (see FEB-D(51)51) submitted to the North Atlantic Council at its Ottawa Meeting. The FEB discussed other matters such as civil shipping requirements in times of war, deterioration of trade, raw material, steel, export controls and prefinancing of arms production. Another questionnaire was prepared to collect data on national defence expenditure (see FEB-D(51)63) leading to a final report (see FEB-D(52)9 , 10, 11 and 13)Several working groups were also created under this Board, such us: GT/1 Budget Working Party (see FEB-R(51)6); GT/2 Working Group on Civil Seaborne Import Requirements in Time of War (see D-D(51)135-FINAL); GT/3 Statistical Coordination and Screening Group for the Study of the Periodic Collection of Data on Defence Expenditures (see FEB-D(51)57); GT/4 Working Party on Scarce Materials (see FEB-R(51)30); GT/5 Working Group on the Atlantic Community (see FEB-R(51)30) and GT/6 Working Group on European Steel Supplies for Rearmament (see FEB-R(51)28). The FEB would cease to exist on 4th April 1952 as a result of the reorganisation of NATO (see FEB-R(52)3-FINAL)

The FEC(STAFF) chronological series contains the records of the Financial and Economic Committee - Permanent Working Staff. During its first session on 17th September 1949 the Council Deputies recognized in directive D-1/3 the importance of economic and financial factors in the development and implementation of military plans for the defence of the North Atlantic Area. Consequently the Council Deputies agreed that a working group should be created which would make recommendations to the Council on the appropriate machinery to deal with these matters.The Defence Financial and Economic Committee (DFEC) was established on 18th November 1949 during the second session of Council Deputies. The directive D-1/4 to the Defence Financial and Economic Committee set up the composition of the Committee consisting in one member at ministerial level (Finance Ministers) for every signatory country and stipulated that the new body would report directly to the Council. Its terms of reference included a provision for a Permanent Working Staff (PWS) in London to carry the day-to-day work of the Committee (see FEC(STAFF)D(49)4). The PWS was composed of qualified personnel representing interested countries. The DFEC could delegate its functions to the PWS as it deemed appropriate. The Chairmanship of the Working Staff rotated with that of the Defence Financial and Economic Committee. Mr. R.C. Breithut (USA) was elected Chairman.The functions of the PWS were to formulate and transmit to the Military Production and Supply Board and the Military Committee requests for information and special reports needed for the completion of the DFEC projects, and to elaborate such relevant information to guide and recommend on specific financial and economic issues. The PWS met 40 times before its dissolution in May 1951. The DFEC disappeared as a result of the modification of NATO‘s structure by a decision of the Council Deputies on 3rd May 1951 (see D-D(51)86 Final). The functions, responsibilities and much of the staff of the Permanent Working Staff (PWS) were transferred to the Financial and Economic Board (FEB) on its establishment by resolution of the Council Deputies on 1st May 1951 (D-D(51)121).

Following the Jackson-Nunn amendment, Defence Ministers in their Communique of 7th December 1973 agreed to examine how the United States’ share of the NATO civil and military budgets and of the Infrastructure Programme might be substantially reduced. On 14 May 1974, Council agreed that a High Level Committee would be convened under the aegis of the Deputy Secretary General to study the financial problems arising from the stationing of US forces in Europe and the prospects for achieving a balance in multilateral expenditure programmes. This would entail assembling data on military procurement and exploring ways to revise cost-sharing formulas in the various NATO budgets. The High Level Committee met on two occasions and noted the progress achieved in the various fields, although no agreement was reached on the level or cost sharing formula of the NATO Common Infrastructure Programme. The High Level Committee agreed that it should continue to formally exist and that its reconvening would be at the discretion of the Chairman (see AC/293-DS/2). In its final report to Council, the Committee stated that the requirements of the Jackson-Nunn Amendment had been met.

The AC/4 chronological series contains the records of the Infrastructure Committee.The Special Committee on the Provision of Funds for Second Slice of Infrastructure was created by the Council Deputies on 10 May 1951 (see D D(51)130(final)) to review technical aspects, i.e. the prospects for the development and practical application of arrangements for the funding of infrastructure. The Committee mainly examined issues related to expenditure and how it was shared between the countries. In July 1951, the Committee changed its name to the Special Committee on Infrastructure, with no change in its responsibilities. In July 1952 it was renamed the Infrastructure Committee and its terms of reference were redefined in document AC/4-D/94. The Committee reviewed military projects and determined whether they could be financed internationally. It was responsible for checking whether the infrastructure programs were the most economical way of satisfying the military requirement, then submitted the results of those deliberations, i.e. the project and its cost estimate, to the Council. The Committee then reviewed the programs under way to reassess their military usefulness in relation to the expenditure required for them. Finally, it recommended the financial arrangements needed to maintain the program structures as well as ways to save money and avoid delays in the execution of infrastructure programs. Its terms of reference were amended again in 1953 (see AC/4-D/235).In September 1951, the issue of cost-sharing of the second slice of infrastructure was temporarily resolved by the Council Deputies’ Ottawa Agreement (see D D(51)248).To apply the Ottawa Agreement, slightly modified by the Special Committee on the Provision of Funds for Second Slice of Infrastructure,a Payment and Progress Subcommittee was created. Many other subcommittees also reported to the Infrastructure Committee.The Committee’s work was carried out in co-operation with the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers in Europe (SHAPE), which issued advice on the procedures to be adopted on standards. The Committee also worked closely with other NATO committees such as the Standing Group, the Annual Review Committee and the Budget Committee.The Infrastructure Committee still exists today.

The AC/4(PP) chronological series contains the records of the Infrastructure Committee’s Infrastructure Payments and Progress Subcommittee.
In September 1951, the issue of cost-sharing of the second infrastructure slice was temporarily resolved by the Ottawa Agreement entered into by the Council Deputies (see D-D(51)248).
In order to apply the Ottawa Agreement, amended slightly by the Committee on the Provision of Funds for the Second Slice of Infrastructure,
a Payments and Progress Subcommittee was created. Its terms of reference were set out by the Council Deputies on 5 December 1951 (see D-D(51)290-REV).
The Subcommittee was responsible for developing programme budgets approved under certain conditions (definition of the procedures for presenting the quarterly forecasts of the amounts required by the host nations, review of the status of programmes, review and approval of the quarterly forecasts that would serve as the basis for the payment of quarterly contributions). It was also responsible for centralizing and reviewing quarterly reports from the Commands and the national governments that contained information on the infrastructure programme, expenditures and the progress of work. It made the call for infrastructure contributions from the countries, opened the infrastructure accounts, handled central accounting, and monitored advance infrastructure contributions. It produced reports and appropriate recommendations for the guidance of governments. Finally, it was responsible for defining the final project cost accounting procedure and the method for making the necessary adjustments between countries.
The Subcommittee controlled such working groups as the Working Group on Utilities, the Subcommittee on the Review of Financial Reports and the Working Group on Overhead Costs and Tax Exemptions. It continued its work after 1966.

International Military Staff Memorandum - Intelligence Division

The Standing Group (hereinafter referred to as the SG) had an internal structure of technical and consultative committees (see SGM-1702-53). The International Planning Team (IPT) was one of these. Under its terms of reference, established on 11 March 1957 (SGWM-175-57), the IPT consisted of three national teams, one for each nation represented in the SG (France, the United Kingdom and the United States). Each national team was in turn divided into three cells. The functions of each cell were determined by their nation. Their field of activity was always the same. The IPT's mission was to study and make proposals to the SG on a wide range of issues: -military (strategy, defence planning, force assessment, annual review, training) -administrative (organization of SG agencies, personnel management, etc). The IPT worked under the instructions of the SG (communicated by the SG secretariat in the form of a directive). This directive was first discussed by the secretariat and the delegations of the three IPT nations. It was then passed to one of these nations. The subject of study could be dealt with permanently or on a case-by-case basis. When appropriate, the IPT could consult the Military Representatives Committee (MRC) and work together with other technical or consultative committees of the SG. The IPT could suggest a new subject of study to the Steering Committee or the Standing Group. It reported to the SG and also kept the SG secretariat and the MRC informed.

The Standing Group (hereinafter referred to as the SG) had an internal structure of technical and consultative committees (see SGM-1702-53). The International Planning Team (IPT) was one of these.Under its terms of reference (IPT/9/5/D), revised on 11 March 1957 (SGWM-175-57), the IPT consisted of three national teams, one for each nation represented in the SG (France, the United Kingdom and the United States). Each national team was in turn divided into three cells. The functions of each cell were determined by their nation. Their field of activity was always the same. The IPT met at the level of national representatives about once a week, usually at the SG headquarters. IPT meetings were attended by the Chairman (French, British or American, by turns), three representatives (one for each IPT nation), military personnel invited for the specific subject under discussion (often from the MRC) and the IPT Secretary. The IPT's mission was to study and present proposals to the SG on a wide range of military issues (strategy, defence planning, force assessment, yearly review, training) and also administrative issues (organization of SG agencies, personnel management, etc). In total, the IPT examined 244 issues between 1952 and 1964. The IPT worked under the instructions of the SG (communicated by the SG secretariat in the form of a directive). This directive was first discussed by the secretariat and the delegations of the three IPT nations. It was then passed on to one of these nations for consideration. The topic could be dealt with on a permanent or case-by-case basis. When appropriate, the IPT could consult the Military Representatives Committee (MRC) and work together with one or several other technical or consultative committees of the SG. The IPT could suggest a new subject of study to the Steering Committee or to the Standing Group. It reported to the SG and also kept the SG secretariat and the MRC informed. Following a reorganization which was approved in 1963 and became effective in 1964, apart from the Standing Group and its three working teams, all the subordinate groups (including the IPT) were opened up to the other NATO member nations (see MC 2/2-final and MCM-114-63). The Standing Group and all its subordinate groups (including the IPT) were abolished in July 1966 after France decided to withdraw from the integrated military structure (see MCM-90-66(REV) and GF(66)D-27).

The NATO International Staff (IS) has its roots in a 1951 resolution outlining the need for a permanent organisation to support the Council Deputies (D-D(51)30). The staff was quickly in need of reorganizing, as seen in a report the following year; the Council Deputies recommended the appointing of a Secretary General at the head of a permanent International Staff (C9-D/4). After deliberation in the Council, The Final Communiqué from the Lisbon Conference, February 1952, establishes the post of Secretary General as the head of an International Secretariat, which would support the work of the Council (C9-D/22).On March 13th, 1952, Lord Ismay was appointed the first Secretary General and in April, the Organisation would move from the Belgrave Square offices in London to the Palais de Chaillot in Paris. National Delegations and International Staff began moving into their offices at Chaillot between the 15th and 17th of April, 1952 (D-N(52)25).Since the 1950s, the International Staff has grown from a few hundred staff members in 1954 to almost 1200 today (C-M(54)115). The NATO IS has reorganized several times since its establishment in order to meet new challenges and take advantage of new opportunities. The International Staff continues to fulfill its original role, which is to support the North Atlantic Council, the Committees and the Working Groups.

The AC/22 chronological series contains the records of the International Staff Team on Additional Aircraft Production.The Staff Team was created by the Council on 11 June 1952, following a proposal by the United States representative which outlined the conditions for offshore procurement of complete aircraft. The United States was willing to procure aircraft in Europe and co-operate with any country which would come up with a substantial measure of aircraft production on its behalf with its own finances in support of an integrated plan aimed at fulfilling NATO aircraft deficiencies.The only meeting of the Staff Team took place on 16 June 1952, and was attended by national representatives from Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. Also present was the Chief of Staff, Defence Production, members of the Aircraft Division and two representatives of the Standing Group.The task of the Staff Team was to determine the scale of effort the individual nations were able to make, and then weld these together into a coordinated programme to be submitted to the Council before transmission to the United States Government. The report was submitted to the Council as C-M(52)43.

This series was established by the Political Affairs Division of the International Staff in April 1972. Addressed to the members of the Political Committee, the documents dealt mainly with the preparations for a Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) and draft reports of the Political Committee on the Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions (MBFR) discussions held in Vienna. The last document in the ISD series was published in 1992.

The Index of Standing Group documents listed the SG documents produced by the Standing Group in 1951 and 1952. These documents were produced by the secretariat of the Standing Group, based in Washington (US), as was the headquarters of the Standing Group (see SG-228-Final). They were used as working documents in and out of meetings by SG staff authorized and needing to refer to them.

The North Atlantic Council Deputies and the Military Committee, at the request of the Defence Committee, held a joint meeting on 13th December 1950 to consider respectively the report prepared by the Council Deputies on the political aspects and by the Military Committee of the military aspects of a German contribution to the defence of Western Europe and to present their joint findings. A further meeting was held on 19th February 1952.

The AC/8 chronological series contains the records of the Joint Working Group on Production, Finance and Military Requirements. The Joint Working Group was created by the Council Deputies on 30 July 1951 to prepare an overall picture of the defence problem as it then stood, expressed in financial terms. The group was also tasked to analyze the financial, military and economic questions arising from the above picture to recommend to the Council Deputies courses of action to be followed by each NATO body concerned.The meetings were attended by representatives of the Defence Production Board, the Financial and Economics Board, the Standing Group and the United States Major Defence Acquisition Program (MDAP).The Joint Working Group held its first meeting on 17 August 1951 and met six more times over the next 5 months, with the last meeting held on 4 Dec 1951. As a result of their discussions, the Joint Working Group recommended the creation of the Statistical Coordinating and Screening Committee, and drafted their terms of reference.

The AC/14 chronological series contains the documents of the Legal Working Group on Reciprocal Engagements between members of NATO and members of the European Defence Community (EDC). The working group was set up by the Council Deputies on 31 January 1952 (see D-D(52)35). At their meeting on 19 December 1951, the Deputies decided to send a member of the International Staff (IS) as an observer to the Paris Conference for the Organization of a European Defence Community (20–21 December 1951) and the Conference of Ministers (27–30 December 1951). The observer's mission consisted in indicating to the Deputies which of the provisions proposed or discussed were likely to involve the question of relations between NATO and the EDC, i.e. those of a military, institutional, scientific or financial character (see D-D(52)3). The Working Group's task was to prepare for the North Atlantic Council (the Council) a Protocol for correlating the nations' obligations under the Treaty Establishing the EDC and the North Atlantic Treaty respectively (see D-D(52)22 and AC/14-R/1)). The Council Deputies communicated their requests for changes to the text to the Working Group through documents referenced D-D and signed by the Executive Secretary. The Working Group applied the instructions in the AC/14-D documents. A first draft and then four revisions were required before the Council could sign off on it. One or two attachés from each national delegation (1st or 2nd secretary, or advisor to the national representative) had to participate in the Working Group. Three Committee Secretaries worked in turns (see AC/14-R1 and C-N(52)4). On 27 May 1952, the "Treaty Establishing the European Defence Community" and then the "Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on guarantees given by the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty to the members of the European Defence Community" were signed (see ISM(52)18).

Liaison Office Communication

International Military Staff Memorandum - Logistics Division

The LMPT was subordinate to the Standing Group (SG). It reported on its work to the SG Director, the SG Secretary and the Deputy Secretary of the International Planning Team of the Standing Group (IPT). The Standing Group and all its subordinate groups (including the LMPT) were abolished in July 1966 after France decided to withdraw from the integrated military structure (see MCM-90-66(REV) and GF(66)D-27).

Military Staff Memorandum Logistics Division

Because the main partners of the Standing Group (hereinafter referred to as SG) were based in London (e.g. the Council Deputies, the Military Production and Supply Board, the Defence Financial and Economic Committee), it was deemed appropriate to set up a London branch of the Standing Group (LBSG). The LBSG's terms of reference were submitted by the International Planning Team (IPT) (see SG-112-3) to the Military Representatives Committee (MRC) and approved by the latter on 15 March 1951. (See SG-112-3-FINAL) The LBSG was set up in NATO's headquarters in London but reported to the SG secretariat in Washington. It took over the SG secretariat-related tasks of the Western European Regional Planning Group (WERPG) and also served as the private secretariat for the LBSG Director and his team. One of its assignments was to archive NATO documents, but also to circulate correspondence from the SG to NATO bodies and vice versa. The LBSG had no power of decision. Its role was to liaise between the SG and the Military Representatives Committee on the one hand and the Council Deputies on the other. Its Chairman split his time between London and Washington, where the SG was based. He liaised between various NATO bodies (including the Council Deputies) in London and the SG. This involved presenting the SG views to the various NATO bodies (on military matters) and informing the SG about questions raised by the bodies on those topics. (See CSGM-003-51) The LBSG was abolished on 9 May 1952 when the Council decided to base the International Staff in Paris. (See SG-112-11-DEFINITIF) It changed its name to Standing Group Liaison Office (SGLO) Paris.

This chronological series contains the messages sent by the SG liaison secretariat (in London then in Paris) to the SG (in Washington) and later to the Military Committee (MC).
LOSTAN messages were often requests for SG positions. The SG replied by means of STAND messages via its secretariat.
LOSTAN messages covered the whole range of International Staff (IS), International Military Staff (IMS) and Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) activities.
They were produced from July 1951 to July 1966.

The TYP chronological series contains the records on the Ten Years Plans. During the Ministerial Session held on December 1959, the United States Secretary of State C. A. Herter proposed that NATO start a long-range planning for the 1960’s. This plan should address the various aspects of national political, programmes (tactics in dealing with the Soviet bloc, public information to promote support for NATO Policies), military (balanced forces) and arms control, programmes, scientific and economic programmes as they concerned NATO (increase of the European contribution to NATO’s defence and aid to the less-developed areas to avoid spread of communism) (see C-R(59)44).On 6 July 1960 Secretary General P-H Spaak proposed a list of first thoughts on the Ten Years Plans including the following items: political consultation, military, economic, information and science problems to be discussed at the next Ministerial Meeting of December 1960 (see PO(60)775). Comments were received from the US, Belgium and Germany as contributions for the discussions of the Permanent Representatives (see TYP/US(60)1, TYP/G(60)1 and TYP/B(60)1). These discussions led to the submission of a progress report to the Council at the December 1960 Ministerial Session (see C-M(60)111). After consultation with Ministers, Delegations sent new recommendations which were taken into account in TYP(61)1. A report on the future procedure for the long-term planning and memoranda on NATO Strategy and nuclear weapons, political consultation, civil emergency planning, competence and objectives of NATO in the economic field and Psychological action was circulated by the Secretary General to the Delegations (see TYP(61)5 and TYP(61)15). The purpose of this report was to prepare the Long-Term Planning Report to Ministers for the Oslo meeting on 9 May 1961 (see C-M(61)30-PART 1, 2, 3 and 4).

The VKC chronological series contains the records of the Long-Term Scientific Studies for the Standing Group NATO (Von Karman Committee). During the 24th Meeting of the Military Committee (MC) in Chiefs of Staff Session it was decided that the Standing Group (SG) should make a study on the strategic concept and the military plans which may be necessary in the 1970’s in the light of anticipated scientific advances. This decision was in accordance with US Secretary of State Mr. Hertel’s proposal on defining long-term goals for the Alliance.On 18 November 1960 the Standing Group approved the establishment of a committee to direct a study of the scientific factors which may have an effect on the military art in the 1970’s. The committee would be known as the von Karman Committee and would be dissolved by the Standing Group after completion of their studies. The study would be directed by Dr. von Karman as Chairman of a Steering Committee consisting of representatives of the three Standing Group nations (US, UK and France) and of scientists of two non-Standing Group nations, namely Dr. G.S. Field (Canada) and Dr. K. Fisher (Germany). The Standing Group members would be designated by the national Ministries of Defence concerned (see SGM-0630-60).The Committee decided that two distinct multinational exercises would be needed. The first exercise was conducted entirely by scientists from member countries who were grouped into working groups and instructed to forecast the state of the art up to 1970/75 for the following fourteen subjects: I. Surveillance and Signal Processing Techniques. II. Navigation. III. Geophysics. IV. Telecommunications. V. Data Processing. VI. Weaponry. VII. Aircraft. VIII. Ships and Submarines. IX. Ground Vehicles. X. Chemical, Biological and Radiological Defence. XI. Logistics. XII. Energy Conversion. XIII. Human Factors and Life Science. XIV. Space Science and Technology (see VKC EX 1 GP 01).The second exercise comprised eight working groups on the following development areas: I. Reconnaissance and Detection. II. Anti-Submarine Warfare. III & IV. Weapons. V. Mobility. VI. Survivability. VII. Communications. VIII. Human Factors (see VKC EX 2 GP 01).Both exercises would produce a report for each subject by the working groups. A Final Report was finally issued in September 1961 merging all the findings (see VKC FINAL) and pointing out other 4 subjects that needed to be studied: I. Environmental Warfare. II. Electronic Warfare. III. Command and Control. IV. Man-Machine Relationship. In December 1961 the Military Committee decided that the Von Karman Committee would carry out further studies in these four areas in a third exercise divided into 2 phases. The first phase would take care of Environmental and Electronic Warfare, while the second phase would be focused on Command and Control and Man-Machine Relationship (see VKC EX 3 PH 1 GP 01).In September 1963 a Supplementary Report was issued including the results of the studies of the third exercise (see VKC SR).

The AGV chronological series contains the records of the MBFR Ad Hoc Group in Vienna. The Ad Hoc Group Vienna was established by the North Atlantic Council in November 1972 to allow for comprehensive consultation, co-ordination and representation between NATO governments at the exploratory talks on Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions to be held in Vienna the following year (PO/72/413(Revised)).On the NATO side, seven NATO governments with territories or forces in Central Europe as well as representatives of Denmark, Italy, Norway and Turkey took part on a rotational basis in the exploratory talks. The objectives of the open ended ad hoc group were to: 1. Give day-to-day information on the progress of the talks to those governments not represented in them; 2. Provide the necessary day-to-day consultation and co-ordination of the conduct of the talks; 3. Ensure that the North Atlantic Council and the Secretary General were properly informed on the talks. NATO Military Authorities were also represented in the ad hoc group, as was a representative of the Secretary General. The Ad Hoc Group Vienna ceased its activities in February 1989 when both sides agreed at the 493rd Plenary meeting to put an end to the MBFR negotiations without any agreement of substance being signed and with the prospects of new talks on conventional forces in Europe to open the following month.

A Military Committee Memorandum, MCM is a document in which the Military Committee issues views, guidance, requests, advice or instructions for immediate or near term use. It remains extant until the issue under consideration has been resolved or superseded. It is the appropriate correspondence for the Military Committee to conduct business with the Secretary General, except on long term policy matters. MCMs are approved by the Military Committee only and no “Final Decision” procedure is applicable.The reorganization of the Military Committee in 1958 resulted in the discontinuance of the separately maintained series of Military Representatives Committee Memoranda (MRM) and the Military Committee in Permanent Session (MC/PS). These were incorporated into the ongoing series of Military Committee Memoranda (MCM). The consequence was that the number of MCM leaped from just 23 MCM in 1957 to 208 in 1958.

The MC fonds contains the records of the Military Comm In accordance with Article 9 of the North Atlantic Treaty and the guidance given by the Working Group on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization during the first Council session in Washington in 1949, the Defence Committee(1) rapidly established the Military Committee (C1-D-1/1 and C1-D-1/2).During its few sessions held behind closed doors in Washington, the Military Committee gave policy guidance on military matters to the Standing Group, and advice on military questions to the Defence Committee and other bodies, and it recommended military measures for the unified defence of the North Atlantic region to the Defence Committee. The Military Committee was directly subordinate to the Defence Committee, and each member nation was represented by its chief of staff or a deputy. Iceland, which had no military forces, was represented by a civilian. Each member state in turn held the Chair of the Military Committee for one year (C1 D-1/2, DC 1/2).Two other groups which also sat in Washington came directly under the Military Committee: - the Standing Group(2) , the executive body, set up at the beginning, responsible for Military Committee everyday business;- the Military Representatives Committee (MRC), created at the end of 1950, to ensure communication of information and points of view between the Standing Group and Alliance member states not represented on it (C1 D-1/2, DC 1/2, DC 24/3 (Final) and MRC 1 (Final)).From 1951 to 1972 the Military Committee underwent various changes as NATO’s main structures were reorganized to meet the Organization’s increased responsibilities effectively. In the context of improving coordination between the various bodies, after the Defence Committee was disbanded, in 1951 the Military Committee became the Organization’s highest military authority, under the direct authority of the Council. In Lisbon in 1952 the Council decided not to make changes regarding the military bodies, and to further intensify its links with them (D-D(51)86 (Final) and C9-D/4 part 6).Because of the extensive criticisms of the highest military structures, and in response to the solutions proposed, in 1957 the Military Committee began to operate continuously, in the form of the Military Committee in Permanent Session (MC/PS), previously known as the Military Representatives Committee. Each chief of staff designated a permanent military representative to sit on that committee. The Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (MC/CS) was to meet at least twice a year, if necessary away from the permanent headquarters in Washington. The permanent military representatives settled matters falling to the Military Committee, except for those requiring the full approval of the chiefs of staff. The Chair of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session was held for one year by each member state in turn. The Standing Group remained the executive agent of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session, but also became that of the Military Committee in Permanent Session. Each chief of staff designated a permanent military representative for the continuous sessions of the Committee. The Chair of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session was assisted by the standing Chair, i.e. the Chair of the Military Committee in Permanent Session. The latter, designated by the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session, was appointed for a term of two years, which could be extended by up to one year. The Chair was a purely international function, preferably held by an officer of a country not in the Standing Group, who had to convene the members, chair all permanent sessions of the Military Committee, and also attend all meetings of the Standing Group (MC 57/1, C-R(57)49 and MC 57/1 (Corrigendum 4)). The reorganization at the end of 1963 only affected the chairmanship of the Military Committee. From that time the permanent Chair was to chair both chiefs of staff and permanent sessions, still for a term of two to three years. A Presidency which changed every year was also established. The incumbent’s role in particular was to chair the opening and closing sessions of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (MC 57/1 (Corrigendum 5)).The withdrawal of France from the Alliance’s integrated military structure led to the abolition of the Standing Group in 1966, and to the transfer of the Organization’s headquarters to Belgium and the Netherlands. In acquiring the powers of the Standing Group the Military Committee became the real centre for Alliance military policy and plans - it made recommendations on military problems to the Council and the Defence Planning Committee, and gave instructions to the Allied commands and subordinate military authorities. The International Planning Staff, in the personof its Director, came under the authority of the Military Committee Chairman. The Military Committee Representative (MCREP) to the Council, previously the Standing Group Representative (SGREP), provided liaison between the Military Committee and the Council, and with other bodies. The MCREP was assisted by a multinational staff and an administrative officer, and together they formed the Office of the Military Committee Representative. The military bodies previously under the Standing Group now came under the authority of the Military Committee. These were the Military Agency for Standardization (MAS), the Advisory Group on Aeronautical Research and Development (AGARD), the NATO Defence College (NDC), the Allied Communications Security Agency (ACSA), the Allied Long Lines Agency (ALLA), the Allied Naval Communications Agency (ANCA) and the Allied Radio Frequencies Agency (ARFA). From 1967 the Military Committee disposed of an executive body, the International Military Staff (IMS), made up of officers from MC member states. The Director IMS was designated by the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session, and was responsible to the Military Committee for the working of the IMS (C-M(66)59, C-R(66)26, MCM-85-66 (Revised), MC 112, MC 2/4 (Final) and MC 2/5 (Final))(3).

This series contains 13 memoranda between 1954 and 1958 sent from the Standing Group to the Chairman of the MC. They consist of summaries of Standing Group activities.

Military Committee Representative

A Military Committee document contains longer-term policy that has been approved/agreed/endorsed by the Military Committee (and the NAC, where necessary). It remains in force until superseded or cancelled.

The MPSB chronological series contains the records of the Military Production and Supply Board(1) . In accordance with Article 9 of the North Atlantic Treaty and the guidance given by the Working Group on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization during the first Council session in Washington in 1949, the Defence Committee (DC) and then the Council (C) approved the directives on the creation of the Military Production and Supply Board (C1-D-1/3 and C2-D-1/5). The Military Production and Supply Board was first directly subordinate to the Defence Committee(2), and then from May 1950 it came under the Council Deputies(3). It was made up of a representative of rank equivalent to Under-Secretary for each signatory state. It only met as required, and the time and place of its meetings were determined by the needs of the moment. A Permanent Working Staff (PWS) based in London was thus needed for everyday business. Each member of the Military Production and Supply Board designated a deputy there, and it was supported by an international secretariat. The Military Production and Supply Board was also represented by a liaison group in Washington to ensure cooperation with the Standing Group(4) (C2 D 1/5, DC 1/3, MPSB 1, D-D/2, D-D/168 and C5-D/2). The Military Production and Supply Board was to look into production and military supplies, in close cooperation with the military bodies under the Defence Committee and other bodies in the same field, and it made recommendations to the Defence Committee. It thus considered the economic and financial repercussions of the defence effort, paying attention to the instructions of the economic and financial bodies set up by the Council, with which it had close working relations. It also encouraged moves towards coordinated arms production, standardization and technical improvement. The Board entrusted the Permanent Working Staff with preparing an integrated supply and production plan to meet military requirements, and with investigating associated problems for short-term studies, such as lists of rare strategic materials. The work was based on the nine major categories of equipment defined by the Standing Group: combat aircraft, artillery, large calibre ammunition and explosives, electronics, combat vehicles, small arms and small arms ammunition, engineering equipment, transport vehicles and shipbuilding (C2-D-1/5, DC 1/3, MPSB 1, D-D/2 and D-D/168). Through the Permanent Working Staff the Board established groups of experts on the production of finished military equipment in each category affected by deficits. There were nine of these groups or task forces(5) : the Combat Aircraft, Artillery, Ammunition and Explosives, Electronics, Combat Vehicles, Small Arms and Small Arms Ammunition, Engineering Equipment, Transport Vehicles and Shipbuilding Task Forces. These were each made up of experts, a member of the Permanent Working Staff and representatives of the military side of the Organization; they started work at the end of summer 1950 in London, with the aim of submitting reports in two months. Most of the work was completed by November. Each task force reviewed the nations’ abilities to produce an urgently-needed equipment category, and made proposals to increase production. The recommendations of the Defence Production Board (which succeeded the Military Production and Supply Board) concerned chiefly the artillery, infantry support weapons, tanks, transport vehicles, engineering equipment, escort vessels and minesweepers (DC 4/4, MPSB SECRETARIAT MEMORANDUM No. 88, PWS(WP)(50)73 (Draft))(6) .To achieve certain immediate defence production increases before the task forces concluded their work, at the request of the Council Deputies and on the basis of information (which was incomplete for lack of time) from the Military Production and Supply Board, in August 1950 the Permanent Working Staff provided estimates of manufacturing capabilities which could be used to produce additional equipment (DC 4/4).The Board was also responsible for setting up the Committee on Industrial Mobilization Planning. This was a committee of experts representing Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States, tasked with reviewing industrial mobilization programmes and with submitting proposals for future coordinated action. The Committee began its work at the beginning of September 1950, in Washington (MPSB SECRETARIAT MEMORANDUM No. 88, DC 4/4).Finally, five groups of experts were created chiefly to consider the question of spare parts: the Groups of Experts on Artillery Spare Parts (GE(B)), Vehicle Spare Parts (GE(L)), Electronics (GE(D)), Small Arms Spare Parts (GE(F)) and Interchangeability of Vehicle Components (GE(K)). Following the conclusions of a working group set up by the Permanent Working Staff, six other groups were transferred from the Western Union Military Supply Board at the end of 1950, i.e. the Groups of Experts on Radio Components (GE(N)), Electronic Valves (GE(Q)), Propellants (GE(J)), Explosives (GE(C)), Steel for Guns (GE(O)) and Steel for Armor Plating (GE(P)) (DC 4/4, SECRETARIAT CIRCULAR No. 23, PWS(WP)(50)73 (Draft), SECRETARIAT CIRCULAR No. 23).The Board operated from 24 October 1949 to 11 January 1951. Following on the resolution of 19 December 1950 and the various proposals arising from it, the Council adopted a Defence Committee recommendation to replace the Military Production and Supply Board by a Defence Production Board with wider powers than its predecessor. The Military Production and Supply Board was dissolved as part of the 3 May 1951 reorganization (C6-D5 (Final), D-D(51)86 (Final)).

The Military Representatives Committee (MRC) was created during a joint session of the North Atlantic Council and the Defense Committee on 18 December 1950. The MRC was composed of Military Representatives (Mil Reps) of the national Chiefs of Staff. It was in permanent session in Washington, D.C. to enable a close working relationship with the Standing Group (SG). The Chairman of the Standing Group also served as the Chairman of the MRC. The MRC was very closely tied to the Standing Group, serving to represent all nations to the more exclusive group. The SG served as the steering and executive agent of the MRC, and consulted it on all matters that concerned national forces, or where national action would be required. The SG Planners also includes the MRC in any of the studies they conducted that required MRC approval, Council or national action or were of national interest. The Mil Reps received regular briefings from the SG’s International Planning Teams on topics such as the Annual Review, Intelligence Estimates and Review of Emergency Defense Plans. Additionally, the Mil Reps or their staffs were invited to give presentations relating to their own countries and of general interest to NATO.Another aspect of the MRC was that, as representatives of their Chiefs of Staff, the Mil Reps were authorized to deal with all military matters which arose while the Military Committee (MC) was not in session. At the time the MC only met twice a year, therefore the MRC dealt with the majority of matters which arose for the MC. In 1957, the MC agreed the MRC should move beyond collaboration with the SG, by expanding the national composition of the planning teams. The MRC was invited to submit candidates whom were to be fully included in the day to day work of the planning teams, which functioned multinationally. The change and internationalization of the Standing Group’s planning teams also coincided with the change of the Military Representatives Committee to the Military Committee in Permanent Session (MC/PS).

This series contains 7 memoranda from the first meeting of the Military Committee (MC) held on 6 October 1949. The MC was to provide policy guidance to its executive body, the Standing Group (SG). From the second meeting, held on 12 December 1949, the file naming format was changed from MM to MCM as can be seen in the eighth document, MCM-8-49.

Between 1950 and 1953, the Military Representatives Committee issued documents on a variety of Defense topics.

Memoranda were originally created for the Military Representative’s Committee between 1950 and 1957 on a variety of subjects. The reorganization of the Military Committee in 1958 resulted in the discontinuance of the separately maintained series of Military Representatives Committee Memoranda (MRM). Memoranda representing the ongoing business of the new entity, the Military Committee in Permanent Session (MC/PS), were incorporated into the ongoing series of Military Committee Memoranda (MCM). The consequence was that the number of MCM leaped from just 14 MCM in 1957 to 177 in 1958.

The AC/276 chronological series contains the records of the Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions Working Group. Following the Harmel Report on the Future Tasks of the Alliance of December 1967, which had recommended in paragraph 13 that the "Allies (would) study disarmament and practical arms control, including the possibility of balanced force reductions", the Council in Permanent Session tasked the Political Committee at Senior Level to undertake studies on the matter and in June 1968, during the ministerial meeting held in Iceland, Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions (MBFR) was adopted as an official NATO policy. A series of studies were launched in various political and military fora in 1968 and 1969, submitting basic ideas and models for force reductions. In May 1970, at its ministerial session in Rome, the North Atlantic Council invited the Warsaw Pact to hold exploratory talks on MBFR. The Council agreed to establish an MBFR Working Group to develop mutual and balanced force reduction models, presenting an illustrative indication of the forces that would be withdrawn or disbanded on both sides, specifying the number of troops in identifiable types of units with the associated equipment (PO(69)634 Annex Decision of the Council).In order to carry out this task, the Council requested that the Chairman of the Military Committee set up under his authority a military/civilian working group open to all Member countries for the development of MBFR models. Close cooperation was to be maintained with the Senior Political Committee reinforced, as necessary, by disarmament and defence planning experts. On 12 January 1970 Lt. General T.R. Milton was appointed Chairman of the Working Group. He immediately established a Staff Group to undertake the basic analytical work for the model-building. This Staff Group was divided into:1) a Model Development Group, to produce the outline of the MBFR models and to establish the types of military units to be considered;2) a NATO and Warsaw Pact Analysis Group to support the work of the model development group with data;3) a Military Considerations Group to apply military judgement factors to the model development.France decided that it would not participate in the deliberations of the Working Group but would continue to take part in the discussions at the level of the Senior Political Committee. In January 1971 the North Atlantic Council agreed that the MBFR working group should pursue its activities under its political guidance and that of the Senior Political Committee.Four sub-groups were set up by the MBFR Working Group: A. Sub-Group on Data Evaluation (AC/276(SGDE)) which was renamed Sub-Group on Data Support (SGDS); B. Sub-Group on Tactical Air (AC/276(SGTA));C. Sub-Group on Verification (AC/276(SGVE));D. Sub-Group on Movement Constraints for NATO and Warsaw Pact Forces. In February 1989, during the final plenary meeting in Vienna, NATO and the Warsaw Pact formally agreed to terminate their work on the Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions and to open new negotiations on Conventional Forces In Europe (CFE). This marked the end of the work of the Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions Working Group.