COORDINATING COMMITTEE RECORD OF DISCUSSION ON ITEM 1648 - COBALT 27TH AND 30TH NOVEMBER, 1959

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP62-00647A000100070016-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: November 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 2, 1998
• Sequence Number: 16
• Publication Date: December 4, 1959
• Content Type: MIN

S ' E T
4.th December, 1959.
C00hDINATING C0iyi1[ITTEE
1E)COhD OF DISCUSSION
ON
ITEIM 1648 _ COBALT
27th an 30th November, 1959
COCOM Document 3716.48/1
Present: Belgium(Luxerabourg), Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan,
Netherlands, United Kin;-dorl, United States.
References: COCOA Locs. Nos. 3700.4, 3716.00/1 and W.P. 1648/1 - 4.
1. The BELGIAN .ueloeation proposed that cobalt aetal be deleted from
sub-item (b) on the grounds that this material met none of the embargo criteria.
They stressed in particular thc..t neither criterion (a) nor criterion (c) was
applicable, and that cobalt could easily be replaced by nickel, itself no longer
under embargo. The cuntinued control of cobalt would incite the Sino-Soviet
Bloc to develop their own industry and to produce substitutes which might well
prove, and in. one instance already had proved, to be superior. reference was
made to U.S.S.R. exports of cobalt to other Sino-Soviet Bloc countries and to
the fact that, although it was possible to extract this metal from cobalt salts
and alloys, some of which were free from embargo, no such exports had been made
by the West to the Blue. (The arguments :ut forward by the Belgian Delegation
are set out in full in W.P. 164813.)
2. The UNITED STATES Delegation referred to the statement they had
already made in W.P. 1648/2, in which they had given their reasons for objecting
to the Belgian proposal. They believed that cobalt metal was used in the Sino-
Soviet Bloc primarily, if not exclusively, for military purposes, and therefore
met the terms of criterion (a). Turning to the applicability of the third cri-
terion, they stressed the small l.ercentago of cobalt 1-produced in the Bloc as
compared with Free i'orld output, the low recovery value of the ore deposits in
the Soviet Union, and the frequent reports f diversions to Soviet Bloc countries;
They explained moreover that despite comparable .iilitary programmes, the total
production of cobalt in the Bloc was less than United States military and
stockpiling needs. No exports had been made by the U.S.S.R. to other than
satellite countries, and the very high prices ruling within that country would
also seem to confirm that the latter were suffering from a critical shortage in
this respect. As to the possibility of r,.;.-lacing cobalt by nickel, they be=
lieved that this was only true for certain uses and sometimes resulted in
inferior performance. The retention of cobalt under embargo was thus fully
warranted in the interests of Free World security.
3. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegation supported the Belgian proposal. 10iile
they could agree that there was a shortage of cobalt within the Bloc, they did
not believe it could be called critical in the sense of criterion (c). Exports
of this material if released would, they felt, like the small evasive shipments
obtained from the West, be used in c ,nsumer industries and general metallurgy
and enLineering, and would not contribute to the military potential of the Bloc.
They did not therefore feel that the defense interests of the West would be
served by continuing the embargo on cobalt. (The full United Kingdom statement
is recorded in Vv.P. 1648/4)-
4. The CANA:jIAN -relegation likewise supported the BelL;ian proposal to
delete cobalt metal, unless proof could be given that such action would result
Approved For Releasg:-E~ '62-00647A000100070016-8
 Approvedror Release : CIA-RDP62-00647A000100070016-8
N-dw
SECRET - 2
COCOM Document 3716.48/1
'in a material increase of Sino-Soviet Bloc military capacity. Referring to the
United States statement (w.P. 1648/2), they did not believe that the fact that
estimated total Bloc output was almost equivalent to the United States consump-
tion of cobalt for military purposes showed any critical deficiency in the Bloc
as regards the production in peacetime of materials with military application.
Since the figures supplied by the United States Relegation in this respoct were
an important factor in the discussion, the Canadian Delegation wished to have
some indication of their validity and the method used to calculate them. They
also wished to know if cobalt was being used increasingly for military purposes.
5. The GEIUiL N ueleGation were unable to agree to the deletion of
cobalt metal. In the view of their authorities criterion (c) seemed to be
applicable in this instance. They stressed the fact that cobalt had given rise
to more diversion attempts than any other item under embargo. In addition they
believed that criterion (a) could probably be applied to cobalt. As to the
reference made to U.S.S... exports of cobalt to the satellite co.,untries, the
German Delegation thought that the processed hoods were for the most part being
returned to the U.S.S.R., and. that it was therefore a case of customs processing
rather than actual exports.
6. The FitENCH .uelceation were likewise opposed to the Belgian proposal.
There was evidence, as far as cobalt in its pure metallic state was concerned,
of a critical shortage within the Bloc. They undertook to report the cogent
arguments put forward both f,-,r the deletion and retention of cobalt metal, but
pointed out that at present they would be concerned if this metal were released.
7. The ITALIAN .relegation were srelpar d to c,ncur in the majority view.
The JAPI SE Delegation felt that cobalt metal was very important in both the
industrial and strategic fie1is, and undertook to report the comments made and
give a final view during the second rc,und. The NE`VHERRLAN: S :;elegaticn had no
strong views on the matter,
8. CONCLUSION : The COiiv1ITTEE noted that agreement had not been reached on
Item 1648, an 2L agreed to resume study of it during the second
round of discussion.
SPG. SEC R .E T
Approved For Release : CIA-RDP62-00647A000100070016-8