COORDINATING COMMITTEE RECORD OF DISCUSSION ON ITEM 1520- RADIO RELAY COMMUNICATIONS EQIUPMENT 3RD AND 4TH DECEMBER, 1959

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP62-00647A000100060073-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: November 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 9, 1998
• Sequence Number: 73
• Publication Date: January 4, 1960
• Content Type: MIN

Approved Fokelease : CIA-RDP62-00647A0S 100060073-6 ';.
FRET
,fit h January, 1960.
5$
COCOM Document 3115.20/2B-
COORDINATING COiaMITTEE
RECORD OF DISCUSSION
ON
ITEM 1520 - R1.DIO kLLAY C0:r11t1UNIC.LTIONS EQUIPMENT
bra and~th December, 1259
Present: Belgium(Luxembourg), Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
Netherlands, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
References: COCOk Does. Nos. 3700.2, 3 and 9, 3715-00/1, 3715.20/1 and W.P.
1520/1 to 5.
1. The CHAIRr1 opened the second round of discussion on Item 1520 by
drawing the Committee's attention to the two latest proposals submitted by the
German and United States Delegations ZV.P. 155202 and 3). He invited these to introduce their proposals. 2. The GERi, Delegate referred to his Delegation's read as follows: proposal which
"Radio relay communication equipment and specialised components
and sub-assemblies therefor.
NOTE: Governments may authorise, as administrative exceptions,
the export of
(1) low power links for transmissions between the camera
or studio and the television transmitter
(2) stationary relay equipment of types which have been
in use as television links for at least 5 years and
possessing none of the following characteristics
(a possibility of simultaneous both way connection
(b bandwidth greater than ...
(c non linear distortion of less than ...
(d) phase constant of more than ...
Export of the equipment mentioned under (2) should only be
authorised where the following conditions are met:
Installation effected or supervised by Western engineers
in television networks registered and recommended by
C.C.I.T. and which serve to ameliorate the propagation
of western TV programmes.
Such exceptions should be notified to the Committee immedia-
tely after licensing with full details and justification.
In the case there should be indication that the equipment
shipped has been diverted to other uses, servicing arrange-
ments should stop immediately."
He explained that this proposal had been drawn up to meet the views expressed in
the Committee during the first round of discussion on Item 1520 and took account
of the difficulty from the technical viewpoint of making an absolute distinction
between television relay equipment and that used in telephony: It was for this
reason that the German Delegation had reluctantly abandoned the idea of an
exclusion clause in favour of an administrative exception Note on t)2e lines of
those already appearing in the International Lists.
3. The aim of the German proposal was to allow the export of equipment
which, in view of its technical characteristics and of the conditions governing
S E-NiL E T
Approved For Release : CIA- 62-00647A000100060073-6
 Approved for Release : CIA-RDP62-00647A600100060073-6
SECRET - 2 - COCOI Document 3715.20/2
its installation, was of necessity intended for civilian uses and would serve
in broadcasting Western television programmes. The German Delegation moreover
doped to restrict export possibilities to European satellite countries. This
-restriction would be imposed de facto by the clause stipulating that the instal-
lation should be "effected or supervised by niestern engineers" - a condition
which neither the U.S.S.R. nor China would accept. Qualitative control would
be ensured by the time-limit prescribed. In conclusion, the Delegate stated
that the text proposed by his Delegation might call for some editorial changes,
but it would be necessary first of all to see if the principle involved were
acceptable to the Committee.
4. The UNITED STATES Delegate first reminded the Committee of his
Delegation's statement on the United States Government's evaluation of the
4ino-Soviet Bloc position in the cor.aunications field (COCOM Doc.
No.
3700.9).
The United States Government's attitude as regards Item 1520 and
items in this Group was based on this evaluation.
the
other
5. The Delegate referred to the Note proposed by his Delegation, which
read as follows:
"Governments will give sympathetic consideration to exceptions
cases for the export of reasonable quantities of TV radio relays
which do not exceed 5 me video bandwidth and do not include
embargoed telephone carrier or terminal equipment and where the
installation:
1, is to be made by the tiwest;
2) is intended to provide linkage between Western and Bloc
TV installations existing at the time, and
(3) is not to be placed in areas where the equipment is
likely to find strategic utilisation."
He noted that the German and United States proposals had a number of points in
common. They both indicated that certain exports could be contemplated under
given conditions. There was, however, one point on which these proposals di-
verged, since the United States Delegation believed that in this highly impor-
tant field each exception case should be subject to prior consultation in the
Committee.
6. The FRENCH Delegate stated that his authorities had studied the
matter in the light of the military interest of the equipment covered by Item
1520. The aim of this item was to prohibit the export of television equipment
which might be used for modern tactical and strategic transmissions, i.e. radio
relay equipment, and specialised components and sub-assemblies therefor, spe-
gially designed for the high-speed transmission of coded data, radar signals,
etc., and fulfilling the security requirements involved, and that alone.
7- From a study of the Geraan and United States proposals it was clear
that both Delegations recognised the advisability of freeing the corresponding
retransmission equipment in view of the fact that television transmitters were
excluded from the embargo. The German Delegation had proposed a definition
which distinguished such equipment from high-capacity transmission equipment
(paragraph 2 above). The French Delegation were ready to agree to this proposal
supplemented as follows:
NOTE - sub-para. (2) (la).
"Bandwidth greater than 6 .tic. s"
sub-para. (2)(a)
"non-linear distortion of less than 1 d'
sub-para. (2)(d)
"phase constant of more than 4 millimicroseconds for a bandwidth
of 6 ?uc s".
The additional parts of the German proposal might be best studied together with
Approved For Releases IA-R13E$2-00647A000100060073-6
 SECRET
Approved Foi elease : CIA-RDP62-00647A0003.00060073-6
- 3 - COCOM Document 3115.20/2B
the United States proposal. The French Delegation would for their part suggest
that the following extract from the United States text might be added to the
German wording:
"Installations not including telephone carrier terminal equipment"
8. In conclusion, the Delegate was ready to continue discussion on the
basis of the German proposal and wished to make it clear there and'then that
the United States suggestion for sympathetic consideration of exception cases
was unacceptable to his authorities. In particular it would be very difficult
to subject equipment at present excluded from Item 1520 to the prior consulta-
tion procedure once again. The administrative exception procedure together with
monthly statistical reporting, on the other hand, fully met the French Delega-
tion s views.
9. The GERivLZ Delegate, referring to the United States proposal (para-
graph 5 above), noted that it would now appear to be agreed that exceptions
could involve not only equipment linking the camera or studio and the televi-
dion transmitter, but also equipment linking transmitters. The Delegate shared
his French colleague's views and stated that, since the administrative excep-
tions procedure already applied to certain equipment under the terms of the
present definition of Item 1520, there could be no question of coming back on
what had already been settled. The sympathetic consideration mentioned in the
United States text introduced no new ele.:ient and did not afford the relaxation
required. The Delegate thought that the bandwidth apj,earing in the United
States text should be 6 iLc/s instead of 5 Lc/s, since the former was the band-
width used by the Soviet Bloc for television j,ur:osos. He believed that in any
event the conditions stipulated in sub-paragraphs (2) and (3) of the United
States text should be further clarified, and would not object to the French
Delegate's suggestion to add the United States wording as regards carrier ter-
minal equipment to the text proposed by his own Delegation, although he did not
believe this addition to be necessary. As to sub-para.(l) of the United States
proposal, the Delegate stated that it would not always be possible to have the
installation actually "effected" by Western engineers and that the important
thing was to have it supervised by 4estern engineers. In conclusion, the Dele-
gate stressed that the principle of prior consultation upon which the United
States proposal was based was not acceptable to his Delegation in this instance.
10. The TURKISH Delegate stated that, in view of the vital interest
taken by his Government in this field, the only solution acceptable to the lat-
ter would be a Note along the lines of the one proposed by the United States
Delegation.
11. The ITt1LILN Delegate indicated that his Delegation were ready to
take the German proposal as a basis for discussion. They believed that the
technical characteristics specified therein would ensure the civilian character
of the equipment exported as administrative exceptions. The Italian Delegation
were also in favour of the principle of immediate ex post facto reporting. pis
to the United States proposal, the Delegate stated that his authorities would
find it difficult to accept the principle of prior consultation, and added on
a less general plane that the clause regarding the installation of equipment
would prove to be inapplicable in practice.
12. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegation stated that his Delegation were in
favour of the principle of freeing civilian television equipment. They felt,
however, that neither the German proposal nor the United States proposal pro-
vided a satisfactory solution to this problem. The Delegate recalled that the
technical aspects of the matter had already been thoroughly discussed both in
1958 and during the first round of the present review without any agreement
being reached. The aim involved was to define the relays which could be used
for television but not for telephony. Three factors counted in this respect:
the bandwidth, the non-linear distortion and the phase constant. The United
Kingdom Delegation themselves believed that, even with a technical cut-off which
seemed to preclude the possibility of using a set of equipment for telephony
purposes, it was easy to alter the equipment concerned so as to adapt it to the
required use.
Approved For Release : CIA-RDP62-00647A000100060073-6
5 E C R E T
 'E~ CRET
Approves For Releas _CIA-RDP62-006QTY i6j.20/2B
The United Kingdom Delegation greatly appreciated the efforts made
by the various delegations to find an acceptable formula, and would give further
study to the German proposal as completed by the French Delegation. The Delegate
did not, however, think that he would be able to accept this proposal, since his
-authorities believed that Item 1520 covered equipment of a very high strategic
value. It was nonetheless true that it could cover perfectly innocuous exports,
and the United Kingdom authorities consequently felt t-,at if it were impossihle
to make a technical distinction between television equipment and that used for
strategic purposes, the only solution would be to examine each individual case
against the particular circumstances involved. Ref erring in this connex Delto
the e-
the conditions stipulated in the German and United States proposals,
gate believed that while the factors mentioned therein were indeed relevant they
were not exhaustive, and the United Kingdom Delegation for their part would
prefer to have a very short Note stating that the Committee would officially
recnogise the fact that Item 1520 covered equipment whose export might be in-
nocuous.
14. The NETHERLLNDS Delegate was in favour of the administrative excep-
tions formula if it were possible to prevent the equipment concerned from being
put to strategic purposes. He believed that the German proposal was a first
step in the right direction and that a test based on the general aspects of an
installation was better than a technical definition. It did indeed seem impos-
sible in practice to distinguish between equipment used in television and that
used in telephony. This solution did not moreover exclude the possibility of
setting up technical cut-offs if such factors were conducive to greater security.
The Netherlands Delegation believed that the conditions laid down in both the
German and United States proposals were relevant within the framework of an
administrative exceptions system. They preferred the wording of the German
proposal, but believed that both proposals might be used as a basis for discus-
sion in seeking a compromise solution. Ls to the short-range and low-power
links, the Delegate advocated the statuo.
15. The JAPANESE Delegate was in principle in favour of the German
proposal.
1:. The BELGIAN Delegate had no firm views on the matter. He was,
however, more in favour of the German proposal in view of the remarks made by
the United Kingdom and Netherlands Delegations.
17. The GERMAN Delegate noted that there seemed to be a certain majority
in favour of his Delegation's proposal,, and that the Committee as a whole recog-
n'ised the need for a relaxation in the controls applied in this sphere.
18. On the 4th December, in summing up the situation once first views
had been given on the German and United States proposals, the CHAIRiVL noted
ghat the Committee was unanimous in the belief that exceptions should be provi-
ed for under the definition of Item 1520 so as to allow the export of certain
equipment. He invited the Committee to try first to agree on the exception pro-
Gedure to apply. Some delegations at present advocated an administrative excep-
tions system and others a prior consultation procedure. This was the point upon
which the Committee should concentrate its efforts at the present time.
19. The FRENCH Delegate stated that he felt it was desirable to examine
the problem of freeing Hertzian relays specially,designed for television trans-
mission. The German and French Delegations had submitted a proposal to which
the United States Delegation had raised strong objedtions. The latter feared
that these television relays might in fact be high-capacity telegraphic or
telephone transmission relays useable in military operations. It would seem
that, if there were no sure way of distinguishing them from other types of radio
relays, the United States Delegation would prefer to embargo all television re-
lays. Under the United States proposal, to authorise exceptional exports of the
latter it would be necessary; 1) to supply them in limited quantities, as
specified by the vague term "reasonable quantities"; 2) for the video bandwidth
not to exceed 5 do/s, although the international limit for this type cf radio
relay was 6 Boo/s; 3) for installation to be made by the West, which seemed dif-
ficult at first sight; 4) for the television relays to be intended solely to
provide linkage between Western and Soviet Bloc T.V. installations; 5) for them
Approved For Release : ~4(RPPE63-00647A000100060073-6
 Approved Peat Release : CIA-RDP62-00647AN0100060073-6
- 5 - COCOM Document 3715.20/2B
not to be placed in areas where the equipment was likely to find strategic uti-
lisation. These conditions appeared to be such as to make it impossible for
Western industry to sell any of the equipment concerned behind the Iron Curtain.
The United Kingdom Delegation, for their l,ax t, had expressed doubts as to the
value of the technical clauses proposed by the French and German Delegations in
the belief that they would not preclude all uncertainty or risk.
20. The French Delegation felt that, to got over the deadlock in the
discussion, it was necessary to go to the heart of the matter. They were cer-
tainly eager to see changes in the Coordinating Committee's regulations, but
could only conceive of changes which would best favour the defence of Free
World interests. They asked the other delegations to start on the basis of the
German proposal which was clear and specific and which carefully avoided refe-
rence to words such as "equipment having strategic utilisation", "equipment of
ptrategic interest" - terms such as this introduced into this sort of discussion
night well give rise to ambiguity and later lead to divergent interpretations.
If the majority of delegations had advocated the study of the German proposal
as amended by France, it was obviously because they believed that the sale and
installation of television relays behind the Iron Curtain would not be in the
least harmful, rather the contrary, to Free World strategic interests. piny
equipment might be called strategic in the modern world (trucks for instance
which were no longer on the embargo list), but the Committee could doubtless
agree that television relays as defined by the German Delegation had very little
value, for the following reasons:
1) Their use: these TV relays could only be used for television
because (a) they did not allow of simultaneous both way use;
(tb) they had a non linear distortion of over 1% (amplitude distor-
~was ncatastrophic for high-capacity telephone Hertzian relays
while phase constancy was very important for television); (c)
they would be supervised by stern ehginea^sonce they had been
installed; (d) they included no carrier terminal equipment.
2) The fact that they were stationary installations made them
essentially vulnerable. The interest of stationary communica-
tions installations where military uses were concerned had been
dwindling with the increase in the nuclear weapon potential of
both camps. Considering the vast battlefield constituted by
the European theatre of operations, a battlefield which might
stretch from the ,Atlantic' coast right across to Uoscow or even
further, it could not be denied that any army engaged therein,
whether Western or Soviet, must have communications equipment
sufficient in itself, to do without the civilian communications
infrastructure to any considerable extent. This necessity which
had already made itself felt to the armies under the command of
General Eisenhower during the European campaign, would be much
more serious in the future if a major conflict were to break out.
The French General Staff believed that for strategic communica-
tions in an extremely active war theatre, it was not possible to
rely,on~4tationary infrastructure.
3) Lastly, if the strategic value of the television relays which
it was proposed to free had to be recognised,.did the Committee
really think that the Soviet Bloc would order them from Free
World countries ? To reverse the problem, was it conceivable
for instance that Hertzian relays would be purchased from Soviet
firms for use in luestorn early warning systems, when the instal-
lation and use of such equipment had to be supervised by Soviet
engineers ?
21. Theee,talevisien relays were not of the most modern type, but on the
contrary had been clearly outstripped even in the U.S.S.R., especially if com-
pared with the types really intended for telephony purposes. In this connexion
the French Delegation recalled their statement on the "Vienna" Hertzian relays
(see COCOM Doc. No. 3806, paragraph 4). In conclusion, the Delegate stated that
S E C R E T
Approved For Release : Lo1A-RDP62-00647A000100060073-6
 SECRET
Approved FowRelease : CIA-RDP62-00647AOW 00060073-6
- 6 - COCOM Document 3715.20/2B
in his Delegation's view, the German Delegation's proposal, whose merits he had
.just described, should be taken as the basis for discussion.
22. In reply to the various comments on his Delegation's proposal, the
'UNITED STATES Delegate explained that his Government were not trying to prohi-
bit the export of television relay equipment but that, in view of the technical
complexity involved and after a thorough study by competent experts in Washing-
ton, they believed that each exception case should be brought to the Coordina-
ting Committee to enable the various participating countries to hear the views
of their colleagues in this particularly delicate sphere. The Delegate ex-
plained that the words "Governments will give sympathetic consideration" should
be given their full weight. He added that the words "reasonable quantities"
were intended to indicate an order of magnitude and finally that the 5 Me/s
out-off suggested by his Delegation was that proposed by the German Delegation
(COCOM Doe. No. 3715.20/1) and before that by the French Delegation. According
to the information available to United States experts, the 5 ivic/s bandwidth was
the one suitable for civilian purposes in the Soviet Bloc. Lastly associating
himself with the United Kingdom Delegate's comments as to the technical diffi-
culties involved, the Delegate stated that, in view of the lengthy, fruitless
discussion which had already taken place, it would seem advisable to leave this
item in abeyance.
2~. The GERMAN Delegate replied that after further, very careful study,
the German authorities had reached the conclusion that the Soviet Bloc televi-
sion systems used bandwidths which necessitated a 6 ivic/s cut-off. The FRENCH
Delegate confirmed this statement.
24? Turning to the possibility of finding a compromise between the idea
of prior consultation and that of administrative exceptions, the GERMAN Delegate
stated that such a solution would of necessity be more closely linked with one
or the other procedure. If it were closer to prior consultation, it might be a
system of prior notification with the requesting country having the right to
issue the licence automatically if no objection were raised within a few days.
On " the other hand, if it were closer to the administrative exceptions idea, it
might be a way of providing for the suspension of the exceptions pred
should the Committee feel that this procedure was prejudicial to thecaimseof
the embargo.
25. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegate stated that his Delegation felt that an
exceptions system based on the prior consultation procedure was preferable in
this field. The United Kingdom Delegation had nevertheless consulted their
authorities after the previous day's discussion, and in view of the desire of
several delegations to define the conditions in which Governments might, of
their own accord, allow exports of the equipment covered by Item 1520. The
United Kingdom authorities had not yet considered the possibility of reaching
afi intermediate solution such as prior notification. If, however, it would
help towards reaching a solution of the difficulties facing the Committee, the
United Kingdom Delegation,for their peat, would be prepared to pursue discus-
sions with a view to setting down the necessarily strict rules which would be
required if prior consultation was to be avoided.
26. The NETHERLANDS Delegate submitted the following compromise proposal,
which was based on the German proposal and also took account of certain elements
in the United States proposal:
"Governments may authorise, as administrative exceptions, the
export of radio relay equipments for the purpose of the relay
of T.V. programmes provided the following conditions are met:
1 Installation to be effected or supervised by Western engineers
2 For television networks which are registered and recommended
by C.C.I.T... or which serve to ameliorate the propagation of
Western T.V. programmes
3 To be installed in European satellite countries
4 Installation of types of stationary relay equipment which have
been in use in the 'est for at least two years not exceeding a
6 viols video bandwidth, not including embargoed telephone car-
rier or terminal equipment
Approved For Release : CIA-RDP62-00647A000100060073-6
S E C R L T
 Approved For Release : CIA-RDP62-00647A8 100060073-6
EC RET
- 7 -
C0COM Document 5715.20/2B
5) Not providing a facility of simultaneous communication in
both ways
Exceptions should be notified immediately after licensing with
full details and justification.
This proposal reflected the Netherlands Delegation's desire to define the
conditions governing exports so as to keep the risk of strategic supplies to a
ninimuu. The Delegate stressed that the Netherlands authorities were in prin-
oiple not much in favour of immediate reporting after licensing and that his
Delegation had only prou:uosed it in the present instance as a compromise.
27. The FRENCH Delegate, again stressing the need for a simple techni-
cal solution, suggested as a compromise that the Committee accept the technical
definition proposed, however imperfect, try this definition out and agree to
intervene when exports reached a strategic level. The French Delegation were
convinced that the Committee should agree to define the equipment under embargo
specifically rather than have to make this decision when each individual case
came up for prior consultation. The text proposed by Germany and completed by
France, like the text proposed by the Netherlands, aimed at avoiding exports of
strategic equipment by defining technical characteristics and installation
guarantees. ,A solution such as this would in the final issue be more realistic
and more restrictive than one based on vaguer criteria regarding the place of
installation or the initial use to-which it would be put.
28. The GERUAN Delegate thanked his Netherlands colleague for his pro-
posal, which he could accept.
29. The JAPANESE Delegate appreciated the Netherlands proposal but was
not able to accept part (3), since the Japanese Delegation believed that the
control to be set up should apply to the whole Sino-Soviet Bloc.
30. The FRENCH Delegate shared his Japanese colleague's view and sug-
ge ted that part (3) of the Netherlands proposal be deleted and the words
"p eferably in European satellite countries" be added after the words "recommen-
ded by the C.C.I.T." in part (2).
31. Noting that the Committee was unaniz:cus in the belief that excep-
tior: s should be provided for under the present definition of Item 1520, and that
despite the efforts riade to identify television and telephone equipment te:chni-
callyr it had not been possible to draw up a distinction satisfactory to all
delegations, the CHAIRuLN pointed out that the Committee was faced with several
proposals which should make it possible to find a compromise solution. Agree-
iaent should be reached on the exceptions procedure to apply and the answer
seemed to lie between the idea of administrative exceptions and that of prior
consultation. The proposal submitted by the Netherlands Delegation was along
these lines, and the Chairman recommended it for sympathetic consideration by
Member 1"overnments. He trusted that the Committee would be able to record
unanimous agreement on this item on the 14th December.
32. The COiB ITTEE agreed to resume discussion on the 14th December.
SEC R E T
Approved For Release : CIA-RDP62-00647A000100060073-6