COORDINATING COMMITTEE RECORD OF DISCUSSION ON A GERMAN PROPOSAL TO EXPORT RAILWAY SIGNALLING CABLE TO BULGARIA NOVEMBER 9TH AND 12TH, 1959

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP62-00647A000200040042-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: November 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 20, 1998
• Sequence Number: 42
• Publication Date: November 16, 1959
• Content Type: MIN

Approved For Release 1999/09/16 : CIA-RDP62-00647A000200040042-1
03
CONFIDENTIAL
November 16th, 1959 COCOM Document No. 376083
C OORD INA T ING . COMMITTEE
RECORD QF DISCUSSION
ON
GEEIMN PROPOSAL TO EXPORT RAILWAY SIGNALLING CABLE TO BULGARIA
November 9th and 12th, 1959
Present: Belgium (Luxembourg), Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy,
Japan, Netherlands, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
References: C000M Documents No. 3722, 3734.
1. The CHAIRMAN drew the attention of the Committee to the German
proposal to export 180 kms of railway signalling cable to Bulgaria. He
recalled that the German Delegation had given additional technical
information in COCOM 3734. He invited Delegates to give the views of
their authorities.
2. The UNITED STATES Delegate commented that this was a very interesting
case. The views of his authorities on the strategic nature of this material
were already well known to the Committee. Without departing from these
views, his authorities had given the German proposal very thorough
consideration. The United States authorities were much impressed with the
full and careful German presentation. They had noted the end-use for which
the material was intended, the consistency of the types of material ordered
with this end-use, and especially the assurance that the cable would be laid
under the supervision of German technicians, who would also control the
installation of the associated equipment. Examining all such factors, the
United Mates had come to the conclusion that approval of this was
warranted and they therefore raised no objection to this export.
3. The ITALIAN Delegate stated that'his authorities had studied this
request with great interest. In view of the stated end-use and the fact
that German engineers would install the material concerned, the Italian
authorities raised no objection to this export. They had also taken into
consideration the fact that the cable was to be used for the line linking
Bulgaria with another Member Country.
4. The FRENCH Delegate said that his authorities naturally raised no
objection to the export of railway signalling cable since they considered
that it was covered by List IV. In this connection, the Delegate recalled
the undertaking his authorities had already given to refrain from
exporting any more of this cable without first consulting the Committee.
He noted with satisfaction the favourable opinions which had just been
given to the German request, thus proving that railway telecommand and
signalling cable, whatever its structure, was not considered as an
essentially strategic product. Finally the Delegate reserved the right
to make further comments on this case at a later date.
5. The NETHERLANDS Delegate said that although his authorities considered
that the cable in question was covered by Item 1526, they would raise no
objection to this particular export because of the favourable ?riews which
had already been expressed and the fact that its installation would be
carried out under German supervision.
CONFIDENTIAL
--------------
 Approved Fo ) elease 1999/09/16 : CIA-RDP6200647A000200040042-1
CONFIDENTIAL 2 6000M Document No. 376
6. The CANADIAN Delegate said that since Item 1526 was due to be
discussed in the current list review, his authorities considered that
ad,-hoc cases should be deferred until that discussion had taken place.
In view of the opinions which had just been expressed however he would
ask his authorities to reconsider their position.
7. The UNITED KINGDCNI Delegate said that his position was similar to
that of the Canadian Delegate. His authorities considered that this
question would be best dealt with by changing the present definition of
Item 1526 during the list review. Since this item was in fact due to
be discussed in the Sub-Committee in three days' time his authorities
preferred not to give their final views on the German request at this
stage. The Delegate undertook to report back the favourable views which
had been expressed at the present meeting.
8. The BELGIAN Delegate said that his authorities raised no objection
to this export since they did not consider that the cables in question
were covered by Item 1526.
9. The DANISH Delegate said that his authorities could agree with the
majority of the Committee.
10. The TURKISH Delegate stated that his authorities raised no objection
to this export.
11. The JAPANESE Delegate said that his authorities would raise no
objection to this export because the work would be carried out under the
supervision of German engineers and would be of benefit to the Western
world.
12. The GERMAN Delegate expressed his thanks for the favourable replies
which had been given. He also thanked the Canadian and United Kingdom
Delegates ftr their readiness to recommend reconsideration to their
authorities. With respect to the present situation of these two
Delegations, he commented that it would introduce a dangerous precedent
if an exceptions case were linked to the list review. The German request
had been presented on its own merits; it was not based upon a redefinition
of Item 1526. The only procedure which might justify linking the
consideration of an exceptions case with the review of an item was the
accident of definition prooedure, which was not applicable in this case.
The Delegate concluded by saying that the Committee had never in the past
established a rule to wait for a general discussion to take place on an
item before giving their final views on an ad hoe case.
13. The ITALIAN Delegate said that he agreed with the general point
made by his German colleague. similar comments had been made in the past
on an Italian case concerning the export of bearings but the view of his
authorities had been at that time, and was now, that exceptions cases
should be considered on a separate basis whether a review of the item
concerned was imminent or not.
14. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegate said that he agreed with the general
principle expressed by his German and Italian colleagues.
15. The UNITED STATES Delegate associated himself with the remarks
of his German and Italian colleagues with respect to the principle
that exceptions requests and redefinition questions should be kept separate,
except where accidents of definition wore concerned and this was clearly
not the case here. Practical considerations also supported the German
and Italian remarks: he could not predict a redefinition solution that
Would automatically resolve the problem posed by the German request;
moreover, the redefinition discussion would only commence in the Sub-
Committee on November 12th, and revisions resulting from the list
review were not due to come into effect before January 1st, 1960.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 1999/09/16 : CIA-RDP62-00647A000200040042-1
 L Approved FdT Release 1999/09/16 : CIA-RDP6*2 00647A000200040042-1
CONFIDENTINL - 3 - COCOM Document No. 376M --
16. The FRENCH Delegate stated that he shared the point of view of the
German Delegation that replies to an exceptions request should not be
delayed becaus@ of the impending review of the item in question. The
Delegate nevertheless considered that the favourable views given at the
present meeting on the export of railway telecommand and signalling cable
constituted a very important element which should be taken into account
when Item 1525 came up for discussion.
17+ The NETHERLANDS Delegate stated that his authorities had based
themselves on the particular circumstances of the German case when they
gave their agreement. They considered that the cable concerned was
definitely covered by Item 1526 but the use to which it was to be put
constituted an example of the pacific end-use of strategic material.
His authorities, at the time of the review,.would propose the addition
of a Note to Item 1526 permitting the export of this type of material
under certain conditions.
18. The COMITTEE agreed to bear the final views of Governments on
November 12th.
19. On November 12th the BELGIAN Delegate informed the Committee
that his authorities had received a request for a licence for an identical
order concerning the same railway line. He would therefore within the
next few days submit an exceptions request for the Committee to consider
as an alternative order.
20. The UNITED KINGDOM Delegate stated that in the light of the views
expressed in the Committee on November 9th his authorities agreed that
consideration of the German case need not await the discussion of Item
1526 in the list review and they raised no objection to this export.
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 1999/09/16 : CIA-RDP62-00647A000200040042-1