- Corporate body
Personal business letters from the Director, IMS
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)).
Le TNP a été accueilli comme un document qui marquait un tournant et qui proposait une solution à un ensemble complexe de problèmes auxquels le monde devait alors faire face. Avant l’établissement du TNP, plus de vingt pays cherchaient activement à se doter de l’arme nucléaire. Le TNP a mis en place un cadre juridique distinguant des États dotés d’armes nucléaires et des États non dotés d’armes nucléaires et définissant le contexte pour leur coopération dans ses trois domaines fondamentaux.
Le TNP est fondé sur trois piliers : la non-prolifération, le désarmement et l’utilisation de l’énergie nucléaire à des fins pacifiques. Parmi les documents considérés, bon nombre portent sur les négociations qui ont eu lieu entre les États-Unis et l’Union des républiques socialistes soviétiques concernant les articles I et II du Traité, relatifs à la non-prolifération des armes nucléaires, et sur les pourparlers concernant l’article III, relatif aux garanties.
A Summary Record of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (RECORD-MC/CS)
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.
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.
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 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.
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
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).
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.
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 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).