COORDINATING COMMITTEE RECORD OF DISCUSSION ON A UNITED KINGDOM PROPOSAL TO EXPORT A COMPUTER TO POLAND 7TH AND 25TH APRIL, 1960

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP62-00647A000200020046-9
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 20, 1998
• Sequence Number: 46
• Publication Date: April 25, 1960
• Content Type: MIN

Approved For Release 2000/08/23 : CIA-RDP62-00647A000200020046-9
CONFIDENTIAL
25th April, 1960
COORDINATING COMMITTEE
J
COCOM Document No. 3953
RECORD OF DISCUSSION
ON
A UNITED KINGDOM PROPOSAL TO EXPORT A COMPUTER TO POLAND
7th and 25th April, 1960
Present: Belgium (Luxembourg), Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy,
Japan, Netherlands, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
Reference: COCOM Document No. 3905.
1. The CHAIRMAN invited Delegations to state their Governments' views
on the United Kingdom Delegation's submission concerning the proposed
export to Poland of a "Short" analogue computer and ancillary equipment
(COCOM Doc. 3905).
2. The BELGIAN Delegate stated that his authorities raised no objection
since the special Polish exceptions procedure had been invoked.
3. The NETHERLANDS Delegate said that his authorities raised no
objection, for the reason mentioned by his Belgian colleague and also
because of the civilian end-use.
4. The ITALIAN Delegate stated that his authorities raised no
objection, for the reason mentioned by his Belgian colleague and
because of the assurances given by the United Kingdom Delegation.
5. The GERMAN Delegate said that his authorities raised no objection.
He added that his Delegation might themselves submit an exceptions request
concerning an analogue computer for delivery to Poland.
6. The CANADIAN, DANISH and TURKISH Delegates stated that their
authorities raised no objection.
7. The FRENCH Delegate stated that his authorities raised no objection
to this export in view of the country of destination.
8. The UNITED STATES Delegate stated that, subsequent to the setting
of the date for discussion of this case, he had received additional
information from the United Kingdom Delegation. This had been forwarded
to his a-tthorities, but the Delegate had not as yet received their reply.
He undertook to transmit this reply to his United Kingdom colleague
immediately upon its arrival, and also to notify the Secretariat. He
hoped that this might be possible before the 12th April.
9. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegate thanked the United States Delegate,
and also those Delegations who had expressed favourable views.
10. On the 25th..April the UNITED STATES Delegate explained that he had,
on the 12th April, informed the Secretariat and the United Kingdom
Delegation that he would be able to transmit his Government's views within
the next two days. Accordingly, on the 14th April, the Delegate informed
the Secretariat and the United Kingdom Delegation that his authorities had
no objections to the export concerned.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2000/08/23 : CIA-RDP62-00647A000200020046-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/23 : CIA-RDP62-00647A000200020046-9
C O N F I D E N T I A L
28th April, 1960.
COCOM Document No. 3952E
COORDINATING COM.+,?ITTEE
RECORD OF DISCUSSION
ON
ITALIMI PROPOSAL TO E),XORT C0189JNICATIONS CABLE
TO THE SOVIET UNION
7th A aril 1960
Present: Belgium(Luxe...bourg) , Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy,
Japan, Netherlands, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
Reference: COCOM Doc. No. 3951-
1. The I24ILIAN Dele gate introduced the Meaorandum sub.nitted by his
Delegation on that day (COCOM Doc, 3961), proposing; the export to the Soviet
Union of communications cable. He stated that the Italian authorities would
like to hear the views of member Governments on the 25th April, and added that
Delegations having prc:;liminary qu;sticns to put on this case might do so there
and then since he was accompanied by an expert.
2. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegate noted that the Italian Memorandum did
not indicate tie name f the end-user -,f this cable. Was it intended for the
Soviet railways or postal an:i telegraph services ? The Delegate would like
information in this c:,nn:ction. He mo-ecver noted that the technical charac-
teristics of this cable were indicated in the "TZB/COST - 5008-49 and TZEB/GOST
5008-49 Specifications". Were these specifications Soviet ones or internatio-
nally recognised specifications ?
3. The ITALIAN Delegate answered that the cable was requested by the
"Razno Import" in Moscow and were to be used for telephone links between medium
sized areas in the Moscow suberbs. As to the specifications mentioned, they
were of Soviet and not international origin.
4. The.-GERMAN Delegate stated that his authorities' position on the
whole of Item 1526 was well known to the Committee, and he could thus assure
his Italian colleague that the German Government would give this case their
sympathetic consideration. From what the Italian Delegate had just said, the
end-user was a central import organis