Telegram No. 1115 of September 21? from our NATO Delegation in Paris (copy attached) gives an outline of the proposed programme for the NATO Defence Ministers' Conference in Paris which commences on October 10. The public announcement of this meeting calls it "a preliminary conference between Defence Ministers in preparation for the regular Ministerial session of the NATO Council towards the end of the year." The meeting is purposely represented as having a routine character in order to avoid giving the public the impression that there is some connection between it and the Geneva Conference at the end of October.

2. The meetings will start with a briefing by SACEUR followed by briefings from each of the Commands about their respective problems. This briefing will include statements on North American Defence problems including a brief by the U.S. Commander-in-Chief Continental Air Defence. The Canadian Chiefs of Staff have approved the outline of the Commander-in-Chief's proposed statement on condition that it includes the following statement:

"The rôles of the Canada-United States air defence effort, one of which is that of providing early warning and protection for the retaliatory forces of NATO nations, considered to be major deterrents to war."

3. General Gruenther will report on the steps which are being taken within his Command in accordance with MC-48, "to secure an integrated atomic capability for instantaneous use". Under "survival measures" he will discuss the atomic posture for his air forces, and will deal especially with a number of measures to be taken in the immediate future aimed at a further dispersal of Air Force units to enable them to survive atomic attack.

4. A study prepared on this subject will be examined by Standing Group in due course and it is expected that Canada will be asked for its comments before its recommendations are finally approved. Meanwhile some of the infrastructure plans are being altered where immediate action is necessary to halt the construction of lengthy runways which are no longer considered desirable under the dispersal programme.

5. There will thus be plenty of opportunity for the NATO Military authorities and the Defence Ministers to discuss MC-48 and its implications for the future in NATO Defence Planning although, of course, no decisions will be taken or agreements reached at the October Conference.

6. It occurred to me that you may wish to have a word beforehand with Mr. Campney personally about your misgivings concerning the interpretation and implications of the Council's action last December in approving MC-48 "as a basis for defence planning and preparations by the NATO Military authorities". You will recall that I sent you a Departmental memorandum (attached) on this subject last July.¹⁰¹

7. It appears to us that SACEUR is not exceeding the authority invested in him by the Council in making plans and preparations attuned to the new atomic strategy. However, the main question which needs clarification is whether it is understood by the NATO Commanders that the approval of MC-48 still reserves to governments the right to decide whether SACEUR's defence plans are to be put into effect including the decision of whether atomic weapons are to be used depending on whether the nature and extent of the threat is deemed to warrant general war as against a limited threat which could be localized.

J. L[ÉGER]