- Corporate body
International Military Staff Memorandum
International Military Staff Memorandum
The Secretary General is the Alliance’s top international civil servant. This person is responsible for steering the process of consultation and decision-making in the Alliance and ensuring that decisions are implemented. The Secretary General is also NATO’s chief spokesperson and the head of the Organization’s International Staff. The function of Secretary General is filled by a senior statesman with high-level political experience in the government of one of the member countries. The person is nominated by member governments for an initial period of four years, which can be extended by mutual consent.
In his day-to-day work, the Secretary General is directly supported by a Private Office and a Deputy Secretary General, who assists the Secretary General and replaces him in his absence. The Deputy Secretary General is also the chairman of a number of senior committees, ad hoc groups and working groups. More generally speaking, the entire International Staff at NATO Headquarters supports the Secretary General, either directly or indirectly.
The Secretary General has three principal responsibilities: Chairman of the North Atlantic Council and other key bodies, spokesperson of the alliance and head of the International Staff.
First and foremost, the Secretary General chairs the North Atlantic Council - the Alliance’s principal political decision-making body - as well as other senior decision-making committees. These include the Nuclear Planning Group, the NATO-Russia Council, the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council and the Mediterranean Co-operation Group. Additionally, together with a Ukrainian representative, he is the chairman of the NATO-Ukraine Commission, as well as the chairman of the NATO-Georgia Commission. Above and beyond the role of chairman, the Secretary General has the authority to propose items for discussion and use his good offices in case of disputes between member states. He acts as a decision facilitator, leading and guiding the process of consensus-building and decision-making throughout the Alliance. He maintains direct contact with heads of state and government, foreign and defence ministers in NATO and partner countries, in order to facilitate this process. This entails regular visits to NATO and partner countries, as well as bilateral meetings with senior national officials when they visit NATO Headquarters. Effectively, his role allows him to exert some influence on the decision-making process while respecting the fundamental principle that the authority for taking decisions is invested only in the member governments themselves.
Principal spokesperson - The Secretary General is also the principal spokesman of the Alliance and represents the Alliance in public on behalf of the member countries, reflecting their common positions on political issues. He also represents NATO vis-à-vis other international organizations as well as to the media and the public at large. To this end the Secretary General regularly holds press briefings and conferences as well as public lectures and speeches.
Head of the International Staff - Third and lastly, the Secretary General is the senior executive officer of the NATO International Staff, responsible for making staff appointments and overseeing its work.
The AC/35 chronological series contains the records of the Security Committee.Further to the recommendations made by the Working Group on Security in NATO(1), the Security Committee was established by the Council on 20 August 1952 (C-R(52)18) in order to provide it with an advisory body to which issues involving NATO security policy could be submitted for a review and preparation of the necessary recommendations. This committee is made up of the representatives of all member nations and it reports directly to the Council. It met for the first time on 10 March 1953. The Security Committee examines problems referred to it by the Council, focusing on matters leading to changes in NATO's security policy. It is assisted by an Office of Security created within the NATO International Staff. This office, which is a standing body, is responsible for the overall coordination of security issues within the Organization. It is its responsibility, among other things, to supervise the operation of the security system on a day-to-day basis, including inspecting national and international civilian organizations, reviewing security matters on an ongoing basis, submitting them to the NATO Security Committee and seeing to the implementation of the Council's security decisions. It keeps the Security Committee informed of the results of its activities, allowing the latter to recommend to the Council such changes in the overall security policy as are deemed necessary.The Security Committee is a standing committee which still sits today.
The AC/98 chronological series contains the records of the Senior Civil Emergency Planning Committee (SCEPC). The SCEPC, also referred to as the Senior Committee, was established by a Council resolution of 9 November 1955 (C-M(55)100). It resulted from concerns expressed by several member countries regarding inadequate coordination of the reports of the various planning committees dealing in civil emergency planning, as well as gaps in the committee structure. Under its original Terms of Reference, the Senior Committee was to advise the Council and make recommendations on all matters pertaining to civil emergency planning; coordinate the activities of all boards, committees and working groups engaged in civil emergency planning, including guidance on issues raised by the new assumptions, i.e. that in a future war thermo-nuclear weapons would be used; coordinate their activities; transmit their reports with appropriate comments; undertake additional studies on various aspects of civil emergency as deemed necessary, and review periodically the progress made by countries in their civil emergency planning and report its findings to the Council.Each nation was to be represented by the senior official responsible for national coordination of civil emergency planning. The Secretary General or his designee was to chair the Committee. NATO Military Authorities were also invited to attend the meetings, as well as the Chairmen of the Boards, Committees and Working Groups dealing with civil emergency matters. In 1961, Council recommended that the Senior Committee delegate some of its authority to the Co-ordinating Committee (AC/134) in order to co-ordinate the work of other committees and to report directly to the Council such agreed recommendations as could not wait for action to be taken at the Senior Committee level. Following a reappraisal exercise, the Terms of Reference were modified (C-M(65)125 dated 25 November 1965) to enable the SCEPC to continue to meet in plenary session once a year but also to meet as often as necessary in "permanent session" (with the same status, powers and authority as the Senior Committee per se) so that work could be carried out on a continuous basis. It was also decided to add to the SCEPC's original TOR the task of screening all new studies undertaken by the specialized committees to ensure that they conformed with the new objectives and of approving the establishment of sub-committees, ad hoc working groups, and other bodies. Finally, it was to continue the work undertaken until then by the Co-ordinating Committee (disbanded on 8 December 1965, C-R(65)49).
The AC/260 chronological series contain the documents of the Senior Communications-Electronics Group. In a 29th June, 1966 meeting, the United States made a statement to the Council on the topic of communication satellites (see C-R(66)30). The US suggested, based on the potential needs of NATO’s future communication system, that a part of the United States Advanced Defence Communication Satellite Program might be made available for NATO purposes. Additionally, it was suggested NATO should make a co-operative effort in the research and development of Ground Terminals. This statement lead to a briefing by the US at a 28th September Council Meeting (C-R(66)52) where the Council came to a general agreement of the direction in which a group would work, and would await a paper by the International Staff that would propose a decision for the Council on the creation of a Senior Communications-Electronics Group, its Terms of Reference and its co-ordination with existing NATO bodies. On the 5th October Meeting, the Council approved the creation of the interim Group, as described in PO/66/457, with an open-ended term, to be eventually converted into a permanent high-level communications, electronics policy committee. The main task for the Senior Communications-Electronics (C-E) Group was to make recommendations on the desirability of establishing a NATO Communications Satellite Programme and propose how that programme could be carried out with respect to legal aspects and cost sharing. The proposals to the Council by the US consisted of three phases: Phase I to test and evaluate satellite communications, Phase II to acquire one or two synchronous satellites in order to service unique and vital communication needs of NATO (which would include the acquisition by NATO of some ten ground terminals) and Phase III for NATO participation in the United States ADCSP. With these proposals in mind, the Senior C-E Group addressed the complex technical, legal and financial contributions required for the Programme. Through the next few years, detailed plans for Phases I and II were developed and presented to the Council and the Defence Planning Committee. Such elements addressed included the procurement of Ground Terminals both in North America and many European countries, progress reports for the Phase implementation, and the consultation of a NATO-Wide Communications System for use in times of tension and crisis. On 6th October 1967, the Terms of Reference for the Group were expanded (See AC/260-D/29), based on recommendations to Council by the Study Group on Reorganization (See C-R(67)41). The new Terms of Reference included NATO’s civil communications whose requirements, which still needed to be assessed, could ultimately be co-ordinated with those of the military. The Group continued to produce detailed documents outlining Phase II of the Programme and the co-ordination of NATO civil and military communications. In a progress report on 24th June 1969 (AC/260-D/92), the Group reported that no slippage was expected in the date of the launch of the first satellite (January 1970). In an 18th July 1969 meeting, the Defence Planning Committee agreed to the establishment of a Joint NATO Communications and Electronics Committee as proposed by the Group in AC/260-DS/4. This committee would become responsible for the tasks that were being undertaken by the Senior C-E Group, and thus the Senior C-E Group would be rendered obsolete and would be disestablished.
The AC/38 chronological series contains the records of the Special Committee of Ministers on Infrastructure. This committee was established following a meeting of the North Atlantic Council. As part of a revision of the requirements for the fourth infrastructure slice, the Military Committee underscored the need for an agreement on the funding of infrastructure programmes, failing which delays would build up and thus interfere with the deployment of military forces. At its meeting on 15-19 December 1952, the Special Committee of Ministers on Infrastructure endeavoured to find and discuss funding solutions (in particular cost-sharing solutions for the projects listed in North Atlantic Council memorandum C-M(52)129)) and report on them to the Council.
In late 1966, the approaching 20th anniversary of NATO and the adjustments made necessary by the French decision of 1966 to withdraw from the military integrated structure prompted the Alliance to re-examine its relevance and adaptation to the existing political context.
At the December 1966 NATO Meeting of Foreign Ministers, Pierre Harmel, Belgium’s Foreign Minister, tabled a proposal calling for a joint analysis of the major events of the past twenty years. He recommended the study be used to determine the effect of events on the objectives and methods of the Alliance and decide whether it was necessary to improve consultation within it. The Foreign Affairs Ministers responded favourably to Harmel’s proposal and empowered Manlio Brosio, NATO Secretary General and the Permanent Representatives to the North Atlantic Council (NAC) with a comprehensive mandate to develop procedures for the study and determine its scope.
In February 1967, the NAC decided to constitute an open-ended Special Group of representatives designated by governments, under the Chairmanship of the Secretary General. The NAC gave the Special Group on the Future Tasks of the Alliance (also known under the reference AC/261) the task of studying “ (a) the development of political events as it affects the purposes of the Alliance; (b) the consequent future tasks of the Alliance”. The Special Group was to establish such special procedures, sub-groups and rapporteurs, and request such staff work from the International Staff as it deemed necessary” [ see reference C-M(67)11].
During the month of March 1967 the Special Group met on five occasions in private session to encourage wide ranging discussions. It was during these meetings that they decided on the framework for the conduct of the study . The Special Group created four sub-groups were created, each working on a broad subject of interest to the Alliance and under the guidance of a rapporteur of repute:
• Sub-Group One, East/West Relations: Mr. K.Schutz, State Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Germany and Mr. J.H.A. Watson , Assistant Under Secretary of State. Foreign Affairs, United Kingdom
• Sub-Group Two, Inter-allied Relations: Mr. Paul-Henri Spaak, Minister of State, Belgium
• Sub-Group Three, General Defence Policy : Mr. Foy Kohler, Deputy Under Secretary of State, United States
• Sub-Group Four, Relations with other Countries: Dr. C.L. Patijn, Professor of International Relations, University of Utrecht (Netherlands)
The NATO International Staff provided secretarial support and was tasked with gathering background material for the sub-groups .
The sub-groups met several times from May to June to prepare a draft interim report which was approved by the NAC [se reference C-M(67)33] following some amendments at their Ministerial meeting of 13 - 14 June in Luxembourg.
Following this initial phase, the sub-groups began to address the substantive issues. Although the reports were prepared under the responsibility of each rapporteur, a meeting of all the sub-groups took place in July to harmonise the work and avoid duplication. After having gone through several stages, the reports were reviewed and their findings compared during a last meeting in October at Ditchley Park (UK).
The following month, the Special Group held a high-level meeting over two days during which the substance of the Report was discussed. The Secretary General circulated a draft Report which was discussed and amended by the Special Group on 22 November 1967.
The Report on the Future Tasks of the Alliance was presented at the NATO Ministerial Session and after some last amendments was approved by Foreign Affairs Ministers on 14 December 1967 and subsequently released to the press [See reference C-M(67)74(2nd revised) and M4(67)3, respectively].
The AC/262 chronological series contain the documents of the Ad Hoc Special Working group on International Technological Co-operation.On 5th October, 1966, an Italian proposal entitled “Europe’s Technological Gap and the Desirability of an Internation Collaboration for a “New Drive”” was presented to the Council (PO/66/460). This proposal acknowledged the need to promote scientific research and the exchange of information in a time of rapid technological growth. The working group was set up by the Council on March 1st, 1967 (C-R(67)10, Item I, paragraph 49). The Chairman noted in PO/67/103, based on preliminary discussion, it was agreed that NATO had a role to play in promoting technological co-operation among its members and a special working group was proposed to assist the Council in studying the Italian ideas further. The Italian Foreign Minister, Mr. A. Fanfani, opened the discussion citing the need to address the scientific, economic and politcal aspects of the widening technological gap between the United States and Europe.Based on the resulting discussion, the Council decided to create the Special Working Group to study the procedure which might be followed for the further examination and implementation of the Italian proposals. The amended draft Terms of Reference contained four main points.Prior to the first meeting, held on 20 April, 1967, the Terms of reference were further examined and defined to serve as a useful base for discussion. Point (a) defined the nature of problems to be faced with respect to disparities in economic and technological development and point (b) defined the requirement to report the progress being made on the consideration of issues by other concerned organsations; such as the OECD and the European Space Conference (see AC/262-WP/2). Point (c) outlined the efforts to be made at a National level, European level and the co-operation on a wider basis, in particular between Europe and the United States (see AC/262-WP/3). Point (d) discussed the area of work which may be properly done within NATO, and cited possible developments in sectors of defence technology (specifically New Materials, Defence Electronics, Oceanography, Energy Storage and Conversion, and Computer Science).On 5 May 1967, the committee developed a Draft Report to Council, based on the 20th April meeting (see AC/262-WP/5), concluding with a draft resolution on International Technological Co-operation brought to the Council 25th May, 1967 (see CM(67)31).A final draft report from the Working group (see AC/262-WP/6-REV(1)), which took into account the views expressed at the meeting on 28th November, 1967, included both General considerations and Consideration by Sectors, and proposed a formal decision for the the draft report submitted to Ministers (C-M(67)76). The Ministers, at their Session 14th December, 1967, approved the report, and additionally recommended that the Working Group now be disbanded. On 29th March, 1968 the Special Working Group on International Technological Co-operation was disbanded. Approproate bodies indicated to pursue a number of studies discussed by AC/262 were the Science Committee, the Defence Research Group and AGARD.
The AC/3 chronological series contains the records of the Special Working Group on the Establishment of Financial and Economic Board. On March 1951 the US Representative on the Deputies Council recommended the establishment of a central economic and financial agency which would be given a broad assignment of promoting effective cooperative action in the field of financial and economic mobilisation in support of the defence effort, including advance planning for eventual wartime measures. This agency would take over the functions exercised by the Permanent Working Staff of the Defence Financial and Economic Committee (DFEC), the Economic and Financial Working Group and the Advisory Group on Raw Material Problems. On 21st March 1951 the Council Deputies after having examined the United States proposal for the creation of a Financial and Economic Board (see D-D(51)72) and the memorandum submitted by the French Deputy on the subject of Economic Consequences of Rearmament (see D-D(51)56), agreed to invite member governments to designate representatives to constitute an Ad Hoc Organizing Committee and to encourage them to submit recommendations for the creation of one body bringing together responsibility for economic and financial work (see D-D(51)78-REV1).At their meeting on 2nd April the Council Deputies set up an Ad Hoc Committee on the Establishment of a Financial and Economic Board at NATO (see D-R(51)24, Item IV). Under the Chairmanship of the Norwegian Deputy Mr. Skaug, the Special Working Group on the Establishment of Financial and Economic Board met during the week from 9th to 14th April 1951 to prepare a Draft Resolution on the Terms of Reference of the Financial and Economic Board (FEB). During these meetings several Draft Resolutions proposals by the member countries were discussed (i.e. Draft Resolution by the United Kingdom on the creation of a Financial and Economic Board (see Annex to AC/3-R/1). A Resolution to report on the Establishment of Financial and Economic Board was finally drafted (see D-D(51)98) and as a result the Ad Hoc Committee ceased its activity.
The SG subfonds contains the records of the Standing Group. 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) rapidly established the Standing Group (C1-D-1/1 and C1-D-1/2). The Standing Group was subordinate to the Military Committee, and responsible for the everyday business of the latter, which met very rarely. It was made up of representatives of the United States, French and United Kingdom Chiefs of Staff. Its office was fixed in Washington. Other member states with military forces could each appoint a special representative for continuous liaison with the Standing Group.
For the purposes of a unified defence of the North Atlantic area, the Standing Group provided the Regional Planning Groups and the other military bodies with the political instructions and military information which they needed. On the basis of the Regional Groups’ defence plans, which it coordinated and combined, the Standing Group made recommendations to the Military Committee, as it was also invited to do on other strategic questions (C1 D 1/2, DC 1/2). From 1951 to 1966 the Standing Group underwent various changes as part of the reorganization of NATO’s main structures in order to meet the Organization’s increased responsibilities effectively. With the aim of improving coordination between the various bodies, after the Defence Committee(1) was disbanded the Military Committee, which fell directly under the Council’s authority in 1951, became the Organization’s highest military authority, and the Standing Group provided the prime channel of communication with the Council Deputies. In Lisbon in 1952 the Council decided not to change its position with regard to the military bodies, and to further intensify its links with them (D-D(51)86 (Final), C9-D/4). The progressive dissolution of the Regional Groups in favour of commands headed by a Supreme Commander, the need to involve the other nine nations more closely in the work of the Standing Group and the poor liaison between the military bodies and those responsible for armaments or financial and economic questions led the Military Committee to delegate more power to the Standing Group, and to create the Military Representatives Committee (MRC) and the post of Standing Group Liaison Officer (SGLO). At the end of 1950 the Military Representatives Committee was set up to represent the member states not belonging to the Standing Group. It came under the Military Committee, and comprised a representative of the Chief of Staff of each member nation of the Military Committee. However Iceland, which has no military forces, was not represented on the Committee, while Belgium also represented Luxembourg. The Committee was informed about Standing Group activities, and gave opinions that were supported by the staffs of all the member states. It sat permanently in Washington, and took decisions on certain questions in the name of the Military Committee when the latter was not in session. The Standing Group remained the agent and executive body of the Military Committee. It was the higher body to which the Supreme Commanders were responsible. It was also the directing and executive body of the Military Representatives Committee. The Chairman of the Standing Group was also the Chairman of the Military Representatives Committee. The chairmanship was held for three months in rotation. To ensure close cooperation between NATO’s civil and military authorities a Liaison Officer supported by a small staff represented the Standing Group with the Council in London. This official had no power of decision.
In 1952 a Standing Group Liaison Office at the new NATO Headquarters in Paris was set up. The Standing Group Representative (SGREP) with the North Atlantic Council represented the Standing Group as the agent of the Military Committee and directing and executive agent of the Military Representatives Committee. Other military bodies established in 1951 and 1952 received instructions from the Standing Group, i.e. the Military Agency for Standardization (MAS), the Advisory Group on Aeronautical Research and Development (AGARD), the NATO Defence College, the Air Training Advisory Group and various communications agencies in Europe such as the European Military Communications Coordinating Committee (EMCCC) and its sub-committee the European Naval Communications Agency (ENCA), the European Long Lines Agency (ELLA) and the European Radio Frequencies Agency (ERFA) (MC 22/2, MC 4th meeting, DC 24/3 (Final), C6-D/5 (Final), MRC 1, SG 112/11)(2) . For this purpose the Standing Group had working teams, a Secretariat and a Director (forming the embryo of the future Standing Group Planning Staff) with only French, British and American personnel, and stationed in Washington. The working teams prepared joint recommendations to the Standing Group, as well as recommendations on decisions which the Group had to take. There were permanent national working teams, made up of three qualified officers each belonging to one of the three member states, and temporary working teams set up as required. The working teams received instructions from their respective representatives with the Standing Group, and if necessary from the national staffs in Paris, London and Washington. The Standing Group and the working teams were supported by a Secretariat. Besides acting as a military secretariat, this provided for liaison with the military representatives of the Standing Group, the liaison representatives to the Standing Group, and with the Military Production and Supply Board (MPSB). A Director, reporting immediately to the Standing Group, was responsible for the smooth running of the working teams and the Secretariat.
From 1950 the operation and the staff of the Standing Group were extended so that it could deal effectively with all questions. A COSMIC Registry Section, a Communications-Electronics Coordination Section (CECS), Materiel Planners and a Logistics and Materiel Planning Section were put in place. The Logistics and Materiel Planning Section advised the Standing Group on questions concerning the Military Production and Supply Board. It cooperated closely with the Military Production and Supply Board Permanent Working Staff (PWS) liaison group. The Section also coordinated and supervised the advisory technical committees then entrusted with questions not in its remit. The nine advisory technical committees were: the Security Coordination Committee (SCC), Intelligence Committee (IC), Public Relations Policy Committee (PRPC), Standardization Policy and Coordination Committee (SPCC), Research and Development Ad Hoc Committee (RDC), Military Operating Arrangements Ad Hoc Committee (MOAC), Hydrographic Information Ad Hoc Committee (HIC), Meteorological Information Ad Hoc Committee (MC) and the Air Navigation Ad Hoc Committee (CAN). In 1951 the Materiel Planners (three officers each from one of the three member states as from 1952) became a permanent working team. The working teams, now known as international planning teams and composed of nine officers from each of the member states, were grouped in the Planning and General Studies Section. The Materiel Planners formed the Logistics and Materiel Planning Section. There was also a Statistical Section attached to the Secretariat. Finally, at the start of 1951, a Steering Committee comprising three assistant directors designated by each member nation of the Group was created to establish firm links between the Director and the representatives on the one hand, and between the Director and the working teams on the other.
After Lisbon, the responsibilities of the Director and the Standing Group Secretariat were combined, and the secretary also became an assistant director (C1 D 1/2, DC 1/2, SG 2/1 to SG 2/4, SG 2/6, DSGM-31-51, SG 7 (Final), SG 2/8 and DSGM-222-52).In 1955 an International Planning Team report was approved which really embodied the wish for increased cooperation between the Standing Group and the Military Representatives Committee, recommending that the Military Representatives be given all the documents required for their work, systematically informed of and consulted about studies planned, and given regular briefings by the International Planning Teams (SG 14/6 (Final)). The many criticisms of the higher military structures and the solutions proposed by the different players led to significant changes in 1957. The Military Representatives Committee, henceforth known as the Military Committee in Permanent Session (MC/PS), began to function continuously. The Standing Group remained the executive agent of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (MC/CS), but also became that of the Military Committee in Permanent Session. The Chairman of the Military Committee in Permanent Session was also the standing Chairman of the Military Committee. Designated by the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session, he was preferably from a member state not belonging to the Standing Group. The Chairman had a purely international role, with a term of office of two years that might be extended to three. The Chairman was aided by the Director of the Standing Group staff. Planners from non-members of the Standing Group were assigned to the Standing Group Planning Staff, while the Secretariat was also internationalized by personnel from countries outside the Standing Group (MC 57/1, MC 71/1 (Revised), C-R(57)49 and MCM-60-63). Finally, for the sake of equitable participation by all member states on the one hand and efficient working of the Standing Group on the other, the Standing Group Planning Staff was made fully international in 1964 following approval of the Standing Group report by the Military Committee in Permanent Session. The Staff was thus made up of the Director’s Office, four divisions (the Long Term Planning Division, the Organization, Training and Operational Plans Division, the Logistics and Infrastructure Division and the Research and Development, Agencies, and Special Projects Division), the Assistant Director for Meteorology and the Chairman of the Communications-Electronics Committee. The Director’s Office comprised the Director and a small personal staff of four officers. The Director, the head of the international organization, was selected by the Military Committee in Permanent Session from the candidates put forward by the non-Standing Group nations, for a term of two years which could be extended by up to one year. Each division had an Assistant Director and about ten staff officers tasked with the study projects (MCM-60-63; MC 2/2, section 2). At the end of this reorganization the Standing Group Staff was at the service of all member states, while the members of the Standing Group and their national delegations represented the interests of their respective countries. It was the withdrawal of France from the Alliance’s integrated military structure in particular that led to the abolition of the Standing Group in 1966. The powers of the Standing Group were transferred to the Military Committee as of 1 July 1966. The International Planning Staff, in the person of its Director, was then put under the authority of the Military Committee Chairman. The Standing Group Representative, henceforth the Military Committee Representative (MCREP) with the North Atlantic Council, together with his staff, was likewise put under the authority of the Military Committee in the person of the Chairman. The military bodies previously under the authority of the Standing Group, including 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), henceforth also came under the Military Committee (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 chronological series contains the memoranda sent by the Standing Group Liaison Office in Paris (SGLO, renamed SGREP after 25 December 1956). The SGLOs were sent by the representative of the Liaison Office or one of his colleagues: -to the Standing Group in Washington (often in response to a memorandum produced by the SG secretariat)-to the Secretary General or the Executive Secretary to inform them of instructions received from the SG and suggest comments The document in question was generally attached to the SGLO. The SGLOs were produced between May 1952 (Liaison Office moved from London to Paris) and December 1956 (Liaison Office renamed Office of the Standing Group Representative - SGREP)
This chronological series contains the memoranda sent to the Standing Group by the SG Liaison Office in Paris (SGLO, renamed SGREP after 25 December 1956). During the period when Vice Admiral M.R. Dick (Director of the SG Liaison Office) was working in Washington (March to November 1954), the LOMs were renamed LOM(W). The Liaison Office served as the link between the the military authorities based in Washington (the SG, the Military Representatives Committee - MRC, and the Military Committee in Permanent Session - MC/PS) and the Council, committees and International Staff (IS) based in Europe It was tasked with informing the military authorities and communicating points of view. It therefore needed a thorough knowledge of the SG's positions and had to be able to anticipate potential problems. It achieved this by making frequent trips to Washington, taking part in meetings of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (MC/CS) and of the SG in London, then in Paris and at SHAPE, and also by exchanging memoranda (SGM and LOM) and messages (STAND, LOSTAN, etc). LOM memoranda and LOSTAN messages were often requests for SG positions. The SG replied by means of STAND messages via its secretariat. LOM memoranda were produced from September 1951 to June 1967.
This chronological series contains the messages sent to the secretariat of the Standing Group (SG) by the Standing Group Liaison Office in Paris (SGLO, renamed SGREP after 25 December 1956). The SGLO/SGREP served as the link between the the military authorities based in Washington (the Standing Group - SG, the Military Representatives Committee - MRC, and the Military Committee in Permanent Session - MC/PS) and the Council, committees and International Staff (IS) based in Europe. The Director of the SGLO/SGREP was tasked with informing the military authorities and communicating their points of view to the Council. He therefore needed a thorough knowledge of the SG's positions and had to be able to anticipate potential problems. He achieved this by making frequent trips to Washington, taking part in meetings of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (MC/CS) and of the SG in London, then in Paris and at SHAPE, and also by exchanging memoranda and messages.The messages sent by the Director or the secretariat of the SG to the Liaison Office of the SG Representative in Europe were given various names: •SECLON when the Liaison Office was in London (July 1951 to April 1952) •SECPAR (April 1952 to April 1954), then STASEC (April 1954 to October 1967) after the Office was transferred to Paris The replies received from Paris were named PARSEC.
This chronological series contains the messages produced by the secretariat of the SG Liaison Office in Paris (SGLO, renamed SGREP after 25 December 1956) and sent to: -the military authorities in Washington (to inform them about ongoing discussions and request instructions) -the NATO institutions in Paris (to communicate the position of the military authorities) The SGLO/SGREP served as the link between the the military authorities based in Washington (the Standing Group - SG, the Military Representatives Committee - MRC, and the Military Committee in Permanent Session - MC/PS) and the Council, committees and International Staff (IS) based in Europe. The Director of the SGLO/SGREP was tasked with informing the military authorities and communicating their points of view. He therefore needed a thorough knowledge of the SG's positions and had to be able to anticipate potential problems. He achieved this by making frequent trips to Washington, taking part in meetings of the Military Committee in Chiefs of Staff Session (MC/CS) and of the SG in London, then in Paris and at SHAPE, and also by exchanging memoranda and messages.
This chronological series contains the memoranda of Vice-Admiral R.M. Dick (representative of the Standing Group Liaison Office (SGLO) in Paris in 1954). Vice-Admiral Dick worked for the Military Committee (MC) and was management and implementation officer for the Military Representatives Committee (MRC). He worked under the authority of the SG and his role was to present the positions and discussions of the SG to the NATO bodies in Paris and vice versa. This involved military advice and information. (See CSGM-003-51 and SG-112-11-FINAL.)
This chronological series contains the memoranda sent by the Standing Group Liaison Office (SGLO) in Paris. After the transfer of the Liaison Office from London to Paris in May 1952, its secretariat continued to produce a large number of memoranda addressed to: -the French authorities (mainly concerning SGLO premises and personnel) -SG agencies in Paris and London-SHAPE -the NATO civilian authorities. These memoranda (known by the acronym “SGLP") dealt with administrative and organizational issues. A large number of them set out the point of view and decisions of the military authorities based in Washington (including the SG). They were presented to various civil and military authorities and dealt with all sorts of contentious issues. Many SGLPs were replies to questions put to the military authorities. Others were requests for clarification from the military authorities seeking a better understanding of the objectives of the NAC, the civilian committees and the International Staff (IS).The principal recipients of SGLP memoranda were: -the Secretary General and the Executive Secretary -the NAC and civilian committees -SHAPE -SG agencies in Paris and London (in particular the NATO Defence College, the Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development (AGARD), electronics and communications agencies, and the military standardization agency).Some SGLPs were sent directly to national delegations.
This chronological series contains the memoranda of the Standing Group (SG). With the exception of the SGMs produced when the SG met in Paris from 25 to 28 April 1956 (reference SGM(Paris) 1-56 to 4-56), all were produced by the secretariat of the SG in Washington. These memoranda were often used to transmit: -decisions of the Military Committee (MC) and the SG to the NATO high commands and the SG agencies -instructions and interpretations resulting from these decisions The first SG memorandum (SGM) was published on 11 October 1949 and the last on 24 October 1966. After the Standing Group was disbanded in 1967, the chronological series of Military Committee memoranda (MCMs) succeeded the SGMs.
This chronological series contains the working memoranda of the Standing Group (SG). These documents were prepared by the SG/MC secretariat in Washington.
They were notes or requests concerning draft memoranda or messages at annex.
SGWMs were submitted for information, revision or approval:
Index of Effective Military Committee papers.
Various communications from the Standing Group, Paris to NATO Secretary General or Chairman, Military Committee
This chronological series contains the formal documents produced by the Standing Group (SG). These documents present reports (drafts and final versions), policies, directives and notes prepared by one or more teams, including the SG/MC secretariat and the SG committees and agencies.The documents resulted from the role of the SG and its task of reporting to the North Atlantic Council (NAC) and advising it on questions of: -high strategic management -NATO high commands -NATO military agencies-annual review and related issues.
RECORD-SG/SC documents were records of meetings organized by the SG/SC Director. The role of the Standing Group Steering Committee (SG/SC) was to assist the Director of the Standing Committee (hereinafter referred to as SG). The SG/SC started off as an ad hoc group. It became a committee on 28 June 1951, according to document RECORD-SG/SC-002 entitled "second SG/SC meeting". There is no document which officially approved the creation and terms of reference of the SG/SC. The SG/SC meetings were held at the SG headquarters, in the SG conference room at the Pentagon. They were attended by: -a Chairman (SG Director until 1961, then rotating chairmanship between the three SG nations),- senior SG representatives or their deputies,-the SG Secretary, SACEUR,-guests (depending on the agenda),-the representative of the SG Liaison Office was sometimes invited as an observer. At the meetings: •the SG Director informed attendees about the SG's latest decisions, but also about issues to be solved, •the three SG international working teams (France, UK and US) took note of those issues and produced roadmaps for the Military Representatives Committee (MRC). The RECORD-SG/SC chronological series was closed on 2 March 1965 (RECORD-SG/SC-574).
Informal Staff Planners Memoranda/Messages
The AC/159 chronological series contains documents on the reform of the annual review. 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). Over time, the annual review procedure became very time-consuming. The review was too complicated and covered too many questions of detail, and it no longer fully served its purpose. From 1959, nations began to question its efficiency. In December 1959, the Council decided to make a more thorough study of the proposals of the Standing Group and Norway on modifying the procedure for future annual reviews. Subsequently, at its meeting on 13 January 1960, it set up a restricted group, namely the Steering Group on Reform of the Annual Review. This group comprised the permanent representatives of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, Turkey, the United Kingdomand the United States. One representative of the Standing Group and appropriate members of the International Staff also attended the meetings of the Group, which elected its own Chairman. AC/159 was tasked with studying possible modifications to the annual review to make it both simpler and more effective. The purpose of the Group’s first meeting on 19 January 1960 was to elect a Chairman, develop a work method and establish a programme. Mr J. Léger, the Canadian Permanent Representative, was chosen as Chairman. The Group met six times between 19 January and 4 March 1960, at which point it decided to present its report to the Council and to discontinue its activities. The Group’s report, which was approved by the Council on 23 March 1960 (C-M(60)20), proposed that the annual review should be carried out on a triennial rather than annual basis, so that nations‘ defence programmes could be re-assessed every three years in the light of NATO’s overall requirements. Circumstances prevented the triennial procedure from being fully implemented.
The AC/291 chronological series contains the records of the Study Group on Financial Problems Arising from the Stationing of Forces on the Territory of Other NATO Countries. During the meeting of NATO Defence Ministers of 7th June 1973, the United States Secretary of Defence invited the Allies to reaffirm the principles of burden-sharing and to consider how they might develop a multilateral programme to assist the US in bearing the serious balance of payment deficits occasioned by the stationing of their troops in Europe. On 1st August 1973, the Council decided to establish a Study Group, firstly to consider the impact on the US defence budget of the stationing of US forces on the territory of its Allies in NATO Europe and, secondly, to suggest for consideration a range of multi-lateral measures to reduce that burden. It was also decided that the Study Group might later be authorized to study any similar problems brought to the Council’s attention by other countries (see C-R(73)47). The Study Group was given no formal Terms of Reference.
The AC/288 chronological series contains the documents of the Study Group on the Alliance and the Problem of Oil Supplies. Faced with the dependence of NATO nations on oil imports from the Middle East and North Africa, the Study Group, made up of national experts and representatives of the International Staff and of the NATO military authorities, met on 13 July 1972 to consider the draft terms of reference and work programme for the study on the Alliance and the problem of oil supplies. Two sub-groups were then established to gather the necessary data on the oil requirements of the civil and military sectors: - Sub-Group 1 on Civil Oil Requirements (AC/288(WG/1)), - and Sub-Group 2 on Military Oil Requirements (AC/288(WG/2)), which fell under the International Military Staff (IMS). In accordance with the terms of reference and programme of work approved by the Council on 9 November 1972 (PO(72)412), the Group was to assess the vulnerability of NATO's overall defence capabilities, covering the armed forces, essential industry and other civil activities directly connected with defence, to an interruption of oil supplies. With the Middle East crisis, partial reductions in supplies for a certain period appeared more probable than a total interruption of oil deliveries. On 7 November 1973 the Study Group gave the Council an initial (interim) report based on OECD oil supply and consumption figures for 1971 (C-M(73)94), C-R(73)60, point III), followed on 11 June 1975 by a second report drawing on observations by the permanent representatives and the OECD statistics for 1972 (C-M(75)9), C-R(75)27, point 4). Its principal task was thus completed, and the 1980 forecast envisaged in the terms of reference was not judged to be worthwhile, so the Study Group was dissolved by the Council on 11 June 1975 (C-R(75)27, point 4).
The AC/89 chronological series contains the records of the Sub-Committee on Soviet Economic Policy. This committee was created in December 1954 as the Working Group on the Comparative Study of Economic Trends in the NATO Countries and the Soviet Bloc. In May 1956, it was renamed the "Working Group on Soviet Economic Policy" and its Terms of Reference were expanded (C-R(56)32).Two tasks were assigned to it: to continue the comparative studies on the economy of the NATO nations and countries in the Soviet bloc, and to prepare periodic studies on the economic measures taken by the Soviet Union with regard to other countries, including China. In September 1956, it was tasked with a regular and ongoing mission, taking on the name of "Committee on Soviet Economic Policy". In May 1958, the Committee was renamed the "Sub-committee on Soviet Policy" and was attached to the Economic Committee. The Sub-committee operated under this name until 1970, at which time its name was changed to "Economic Sub-committee on Soviet Economic Policy" (C-R(70)8). As far as the end of its work is concerned, no document has been found attesting to the Sub-committee's disbandment. It appears to have amalgamated with the Economic Committee(1). The last record in this series was circulated on 10 August 1972.
The NPT was hailed as a landmark treaty, offering a solution to a complicated set of problems facing the world at the time. Prior to the NPT, more than 20 countries were actively seeking nuclear weapons. The NPT created a legal framework defining nuclear weapon possessor and non-possessor states, and providing the context for their cooperation on all three pillars.
The Treaty is founded on three pillars: non-proliferation; disarmament; and peaceful use of nuclear weapons. Many of the records focus on US-USSR negotiations on Articles I and II of the Treaty regarding stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, and talks about Article III, on safeguards.
The TOSHAP chronological sub-series contains messages sent by the Standing Group (SG) secretariat. Many of the TOSHAPs are replies to messages from SHAPE or SACEUR (SHAPTO). They were sent: for action, to: -SHAPE or SACEUR -the British, then French Ministry of Defence -(sometimes also the Ministry of Defence of other NATO nations)for information, to:- the SG Liaison Office in London, then Paris -NATO commands -SG agencies
On 24 April 1957, the Council approved the report of the Task Force on Further Action in the Field of Scientific and Technical Cooperation in its "first version" (AC/123) (see C-R(57)25) and thereby the creation of AC/132 in place of AC/123. Under its terms of reference (C-M(57)50), AC/132 was required to prepare a conference of experts on actions to be taken to develop the following in the NATO nations: -a highly-qualified scientific and technical workforce-applied research (see AC/132-R/1)For NATO and the western camp, the objective was to gain the advantage over the Soviet Union in terms of defence, economics and cultural life. AC/132 was composed of: -Dr J.B. Koepfli (Chairman) and a special assistant -one or two representatives for Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom -the SHAPE Scientific Advisor The invited representatives were required to keep informed those countries which were not involved in the work. AC/132 validated a list of actions to be taken by NATO (proposed by the Chairman's assistant) (see AC/132-R/2): -create an international documentation centre-create NATO institutes specializing in research and development-develop exchange programmes between NATO nation scientists-create a science committee -create a post of Science Advisor to the Secretary General. The idea of a conference of experts was put on hold. The work of AC/132 then came to an end.
The TCC chronological series contains the records of the Temporary Council Committee. The Temporary Council Committee was established by a decision of the North Atlantic Council on 19 September 1951 (C/8-D/19) in order to examine issues related to the need to reconcile the requirements of external security on the one hand and the real possibilities of the member nations on the political and economic fronts on the other. The committee comprised representatives from the twelve member nations and was chaired by Mr. Averell Harriman (United States). An Executive Bureau (EB) responsible for carrying out the analytical work was set up(1). In October 1951, a Selection and Assessment Committee (SCC) was established (TCC-D(51)/2) to make recommendations on the cost-cutting measures capable of reducing the cost of establishing and maintaining military forces(2). In October 1951, the member nations received a questionnaire designed to objectively analyze the military situation. The questions asked dealt with the status of the land, sea and air components, as well as the arrangements for increasing the Armed Forces' manning levels. Before the Committee had completed its work, an interim report was submitted (TCC-D/18 and D/19, C/8-D/8) at the 8th Council session in Rome. The Committee's final report was submitted on 18 December 1951 (TCC Report). The Committee was then disbanded on 19 Febrary 1952 (see TCC-R/23).
The SCS chronological series contains the records of the Screening and Costing Staff of the Temporary Council Committee.
Set up as the Screening and Costing Committee (SCC) on 12 October 1951 by the Executive Board of the Temporary Council Committee, this body was tasked with making recommendations on the cost-cutting measures likely to reduce the cost of establishing and maintaining military forces. Its goal, then, was to identify the lowest costs possible in the interests of cost-cutting. Its studies dealt primarily with the cost of the Army and defence (TCC-D/2 and TCC D/4).
On 26 October 1951, the Temporary Council Committee decided that the Screening and Costing Committee would henceforth be referred to as the Screening and Costing Staff (SCS), and that all references to the Screening and Costing Committee in documents would be deemed to refer to the Screening and Costing Staff (TCC-R/6).
The Screening and Costing Staff was disbanded at the same time as the Temporary Council Committee in February 1952.
The AC/76 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group in charge of studying the Supervision, Operation and Maintenance of the NATO Pipeline System. This working group was set up by the Council on 12 May 1954 (C-R(54)21). It was tasked with studying the proposals of the Permanent Group (SGM 234-54) for the supervision, operation and maintenance of the NATO POL pipeline system. Its first meeting took place on 21 May 1954, chaired by Mr. A.R.G. Barnes, the Deputy Executive Secretary, assisted by national representatives, members of the International Staff and representatives of the Permanent Group and SHAPE.
At its fifth meeting on 15-16 February 1955, the Working Group in charge of the Supervision, Operation and Maintenance of the NATO Pipeline System decided to entrust the organization of the pipeline system for the Central Europe area to an ad hoc working group made up of representatives from the countries concerned. A second working group, composed of representatives from the Host Nations and User Nations located in the North and South Command zones, was tasked with examining the question of how to organize the system for the north and south European regions.
Their deliberations resulted in a report to the Council, submitted as C-M(55)74 and dated 5 August 1955. In its work, the Group took into account, inter alia, the following points:
(a) the NATO POL pipeline system is an extensive and complex network with an estimated length of approximately 7,000 km and a storage capacity of about 1,743,000 m3.
(b) The Organization must be ready to commence operations as usable sections are completed.
(c) The networks must be capable of meeting military requirements at all times.
It was proposed to structure the NATO POL system as follows:
(1) Central Europe region- NATO Pipeline Committee- Central Europe Pipeline Policy Committee- Central Europe Pipeline Office- Central Europe Operating Agency
(2) North and South European Regions - NATO Pipeline Committee - National pipeline agencies (made up of representatives from the NATO nation hosting a particular pipeline system).
At the Council meeting on 14th September 1955, Report C-M(55)74 was approved, and the Working Group was invited to continue its deliberations in this area and to submit a second report to the Council in a timely fashion (C-R(55)37).On 23 September 1955, the Working Group in Charge of Studying the Supervision, Operation and Maintenance of the NATO Pipeline System appointed a subgroup made up of representatives from the user nations in Central Europe and tasked it to develop a detailed Programme of Work for the Central Europe Pipeline Office and the Central Europe Operating Agency (AC/76-R/8). This Central Europe Subgroup, under reference AC/76 (CE), began its work that same day.
The Working Group's second report to the Council (C-M(56)30, dated 12 March 1956) dealt with the issue of initial linefills. Following on the above two reports, a third and final report by the Working Group was submitted to the Council (C-M(56)83, dated 20 June 1956). Developed by the Central Europe Subgroup, it contained a draft TOR for the Central Europe Pipeline Office. On 11 June 1956, after completing its work, the Working Group decided to disband.
The AC/28 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group of Production and Logistics Experts on the Conversion of American Drawings. The Working Group was created as a result of a meeting between the National Delegations and the Production and Logistics Division on 11 September 1952 (AC/28-D/1). The purpose was to assemble a group of experts to study the problem of converting US technical drawings to permit the manufacture of US equipment and spare parts in Europe. The meetings of the Working Group were attended by technical experts of the national delegations and a Standing Group Liaison Officer. The Working Group met for the first time on 15 September 1952, and held a total of seven meetings over the next two years, the last being on 18 Dec 1953. During these meetings the group discussed the various challenges in the conversion of US technical drawings, such as the measurement and projection systems used, the different testing standards and the symbols used to represent surface finish. The Working Group also discussed how the conversions could make use of and help implement the standards that were being developed by the emerging International Standards Organization (ISO).The Working Group continued to issue documents containing the converted drawings after its last meeting, with the last document issued on 19 March 1959.
The AC/16 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Aircraft Production Planning. The Working Group was created by the North Atlantic Council on 2 April 1952 to review the recommendations laid out in a report by the Combined Aircraft Working Party on 18th January 1952, in light of the comments of Member Governments. The meetings of the Working Group were chaired by Group Captain Lee of the United Kingdom, and were attended by representatives of Canada, France, Italy, the Netherlands, the United States, the United Kingdom, the International Staff and NATO and the DPE. A representative for Belgium was present only at the first meeting. The Working Group held its first meeting on 7 April 1952 and met three more times in that month. During these meetings the Working Group proposed changes to the recommendations for Aircraft Production Planning. The last meeting of the Working Group was held on 16 April 1952.
The AC/108 chronological series contains the documents of the Working Group on Article 2 Survey. This working group was established by a Council decision (see C-R(56)24) to verify and review the survey of Article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty (see C-M(56)45). It met regularly between May and October 1956, after which time the Working Group continued to consider possible amendments to the new version of Article 2 that was presented in August 1956, with a view to publishing them before the end of 1956. Once its task was completed in December 1956, the Working Group’s work came to an end.
The AC/29 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Definition of Common Infrastructure. The Working Group was created by the North Atlantic Council on the 21 October 1952 to discuss the objections raised by the Portuguese government to a decision from the Joint Meeting of the Infrastructure Committee and the Military Budget Committee that certain items were suitable for inclusion in International Military Budgets rather than an Infrastructure Program. The meetings of the Working Group were chaired by Mr. A.J. Bastin and were attended by representatives of the delegations of Canada, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. Mr. R. Stinglhamber (secretary) from the International Staff was also present as well as Lt. Col. Paul M. Strando, a Standing Group Liaison Officer. The Working Group held its first meeting on the 21 October 1952 and met four more times over the succeeding year. During these meetings, the Working Group discussed what criteria the Joint Meeting of the Infrastructure Committee and Military Budget Committee used to arrive at their decision and also to appoint a working group that would devise a clear- cut definition of infrastructure. The last meeting of the Working Group was held on the 7 May 1953.
The AC/202 chronological series contains records of the Working Group on Economic Counter-measures. This group was established by the Council on 21 August 1961 (C-R(61)37) to examine the economic measures proposed by the Group of Four (United States, United Kingdom, France and the Federal Republic of Germany) further to the Soviet ultimatum of June 1961 (Berlin crisis). Consisting of members of the Political and Economics Committees, it was chaired jointly by the Chairmen of both committees. Its full name was "Working Group on Possible Economic Counter-Measures to deal with the Berlin Crisis". The Group was assigned the following tasks: - to examine the various aspects of the economic counter-measures being contemplated by the four Powers; - to seek to assess the political and economic impact of the enforcement of a total economic blockade of the Soviet bloc, as well as such special economic counter-measures as may be appropriate to deal with various eventualities; - to consider the consequences which the application of these measures would entail for each NATO country, as well as the resources for avoiding or mitigating any unfavourable impact on these countries.The Group met twelve times between 25 August 1961 and 21 December 1961, at which time it was decided to submit its final report to the Council and terminate its work.
The AC/24 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Information Policy. This group was established by the Council on 25 June 1952 under the title "Working Group on General Information Policy". It was given the following terms of reference:1)assemble the ideas to be inculcated in the nations of the Atlantic Community;2) express opinions on how these ideas should be presented;3)express opinions on the choice of bodies or resources to be employed in discharging its duties. The Group met for the first time on 9 July 1952. In early December 1952, it deleted the word "general" from its title, assuming the name "Working Group on Information Policy".At its meeting on 24 July 1952, the Council broadened the Working Group's terms of reference, tasking it to report back on the most practical methods for allowing NATO to advise governments on the best policy to be adopted in order to counter Communist propaganda. Among the tasks performed by the Group, also worthy of mention is the preparation and organization of the Conference on NATO Information Policy, which was held in February 1953. The Group also discussed issues pertaining to NATO's policy objectives in the areas of propaganda and counter-propaganda, radio programming, tours by journalists, etc. In July 1953, further to a Council decision, the Working Group on Information Policy merged with the Working Group on Social and Cultural Co-operation(1) to form the Committee on Information and Cultural Relations(2).
The AC/36 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Labour Mobility.The origins of this working group can be found in a Council Deputies memorandum (see D-D(52)94) that was discussed by the Council in its meeting on 18 September 1952 (see C-R(52)21). On that occasion, a decision was taken to create a limited section of the International Staff tasked with looking into the issue of manpower, plus a Working Group on Labour Mobility to which the limited section would submit the conclusions of its work.The Group was chaired by the Greek Permanent Representative, and Italy and the United States were represented by their permanent representatives. The first meeting was held on 24 October 1952. The Working Group was tasked with examining the issue of labour, and more specifically: - ways of intensifying migration;- projects designed to keep the manpower shortage from affecting defensive activities;- plans to prevent labour market disturbances in the event of war.Reports were drafted by the Member country governments and presented to the Working Group for use in its work. There was also a Manpower Planning Committee, whose documents were first incorporated into the AC/36 series before being differentiated from the documents of the Working Group on Labour Mobility and given the reference AC/36(M) in January 1955. Many documents produced between January 1953 and January 1955 that were recorded under the AC/36 reference were actually issued by the Working Group on Labour Mobility.The Working Group was disbanded before producing its final report for 1957.
The AC/6 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Security in NATO.This group was established on 11 June 1951 by the North Atlantic Council's Deputies (D-R(51)46). Its task was to examine a proposed revision of the security system at NATO contained in document DC 2/7, and to report back to the Council Deputies on the subject.The Working Group on Security in NATO discussed the document in question at its meetings from July to November 1951. In its report dated 12 March 1952, the Group presented its final recommendations on the organization of security at NATO. At their meeting on 19 March, 1952, the Council Deputies approved the above report, and asked the Group to report on the possibility of establishing a European Security Committee.The Working Group discussed this topic over four sessions. At its meeting on 19 May 1952, it set up an editorial committee responsible for developing a proposal to create a European security service. The object of the proposal to revise the security system at NATO proposed in the Working Group Chairman's report dated 25 July 1952 was to implement the two fundamental principles on which the Working Group had agreed. The following recommendations were made: 1) establishment of a NATO Security Committee(1) on which all member nations should be represented, which would be responsible for submitting recommendations to the Council on matters likely to change NATO's security policy;2) establishment of a permanent Security Office within the International Staff responsible for coordinating the security system as a whole at NATO.The Council approved this report at its meeting on 20 August 1952. In July 1952, since its work was now complete, the Working Group on Security in NATO was disbanded.
The AC/11 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Sharing Costs of SACLANT (Supreme Allied Command Atlantic) Headquarters. The Working Group was created by the Council Deputies on 22 August 1951 and given the task of finding a formula for sharing the costs of the SACLANT budget (D-R(51)63). The meetings were chaired by G. O. J. van Tets and attended by a representative of each national delegation. The Working Group held its first meeting on 18 October 1951 and met six additional times over the proceeding seven months. During the meetings the Working Group discussed how the costs of the SACLANT Headquarters should be divided amongst them. This proved to be a very contentious issue and there was considerable debate on the subject. Numerous proposals were made over the course of the meetings; some favoured grouping the nations by size, while others preferred to derive the contribution from GNP. The Working Group finally agreed, albeit with reservations, to a method of dividing the costs on their last meeting on 4 April 1952.
The AC/7 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Shipping Needs in Times of War. The Working Group was created by the Council Deputies during their meeting on 5 July 1951 to clarify the issue of shipping requirements in times of war, following a cable from the Standing Group on the topic (AC/7-N/1). The meeting of the working group was attended by a representative of each national delegation, an officer of the Standing Group, the Chairman of the Planning Board for Ocean Shipping (PBOS), a representative from SHAPE and a member of the Financial and Economic Board. The Working Group held its first and only meeting on 19 July 1951. They discussed the finer points of war time shipping, particularly the distinction between civil and military needs.
The AC/31 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Social and Cultural Co-operation. This group was set up by the Council in September 1952 in order to continue the studies undertaken by the Atlantic Community Committee(1) and to ascertain how to implement the approved projects. The Working Group met for the first time on 10 December 1952. Its first task was to more closely define the scope of its work and develop a Programme of Work. Initially, it focused its efforts on developing proposals aimed at promoting cultural co-operation at the international level, whether within various international, government or other organizations, or within the framework of bilateral and regional agreements which were given concrete form, for example, by exchanges of teaching staff, students and documents. The Group also addressed issues involving NATO scientific research, and looked for ways of fostering cultural co-operation with the Armed Forces of the NATO nations. In July 1953, further to a Council decision, the Working Group on Social and Cultural Co-operation merged with the Working Group on Information Policy(2) to form the Committee on Information and Cultural Relations(3).
The AC/17 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on TCC Questionnaires. The Working Group was created by the North Atlantic Council Deputies to give the Greek and Turkish Representatives an idea of the kind of information the International Secretariat wished to know about their countries, in order to carry out the annual review in the autumn of 1952. The meeting of the Working Group was chaired by Mr. G.S. Taylor and was attended by representatives of the Greek and Turkish delegations, as well as members of the Defence Production Board, Financial and Economic Board, the Standing Group and Council Deputies. The Working Group held its first and only meeting on 1 April 1952.
The AC/30 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Taxation of Certain International Employees. The Working Group was created by the International Secretariat, upon receiving instruction by the North Atlantic Council to make arrangements to study the question, raised by the Legal Working Group, of exemption from income tax of the emoluments of the international staff of NATO and of NATO military headquarters. The first meeting of the Working Group was held on 27 October 1952, and was attended by a member of each national delegation. Two subsequent meetings were held on 16 June and 21 July 1953. During these meetings the delegates discussed the various proposals put forward on establishing a suitable scheme for the taxation of members of the International Staff, taking into account the system used by other international organisations. The Working Group submitted their final report to the Council on 28 October 1953. In 1957 two further documents were issued under the AC/30 series, this time as the Working Group on the Taxation of International Staff Emoluments. This Working Group was created by the Civilian Budget Committee on 7 February 1957. The group held one meeting on 19 March 1957 and consisted of delegates from Turkey, Italy and the United States.
The TSP chronological series contains the memoranda of the Working Group on Trends of Soviet Policy(1). The first document is dated 6 June 1956. The object of the last meeting of the Group, which was held on 19 November 1956, was to finalize the document for the Ministers.
The AC/34 chronological series contains the documents of the Working Group on Trends of Soviet Policy(1) . The Working Group was set up by the Council at its 8 October 1952 meeting, and tasked with drafting a report, for the next ministerial session of the Council, on the line of Soviet foreign policy (C-R(52)24, item 5) - which had previously been considered by the Political Working Group(2). To this end national experts met and drafted the document on the basis of the information and views communicated to the International Staff Political Affairs Division by the delegations (C-R(52)24). Other reports followed for the periods April 1953 to December 1953, December 1953 to April 1954, April 1954 to November 1954 and December 1954 to April 1955. The Working Group operated from 29 October 1952 until 19 November 1956. Its work was taken over by the Political Committee(3) which was created in January 1957.
The AC/5 chronological series contains the records of the Working Group on Use of Export Controls. In a resolution adopted on 18 September 1950, the Council Deputies drew attention to the shortage and high cost of the raw materials needed for military production and asked the Deputies to take action (see C5-D/4(Final). The Working Group on Use of Export Controls (hereinafter referred to as the Working Group) was created and its terms of reference approved by the Council Deputies on 8 December 1950 (see D-D/207). The shortage of raw materials was a concern outside the NATO framework. Reports to this effect were sent by various nations to NATO, the OEEC and international conferences on raw materials. The Working Group's mission was threefold. Firstly, it checked that these reports did not run counter to NATO's interests in respect of defence production. Secondly, it assessed the seriousness of the shortage and the prospects for improvement. Finally, if these prospects were not satisfactory, it submitted recommendations to the Council Deputies. The Working Group cooperated closely with the Chairman of the Defence Production Board and reported to the Council Deputies. On 10 April 1951, the Defence Production Board submitted a list of raw materials of which there was a critical shortage and which were needed as a matter of urgency (see D-D(51)94). On this basis, the Working Group began its work. It held its first meeting on 14 December 1950 and its last meeting on 18 June 1951 (see AC/5-R/2).