INF: UK REPORT ON SOVIET DEMARCHE ON GENEVA INF NEGOTIATIONS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 1, 2010
• Sequence Number: 13
• Publication Date: January 12, 1983
• Content Type: CABLE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/01: CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
-(TEMPO 0262935 0121757Z FRP!
.CONFIDENTIAL
FRP S , 2,:3 r
STATE
r6,
83 0262935
SCO
PAGE 001 NC 0262935
TORS 12 75U , -.$3
?~w~,~~~-wilr~+w~~Ir~*~+ri~~~+~~~w~ar~a~Irw~w~lr*e+IM+~w#~w~All~rl~~+l~+~r~sw*-~Mww~r~~rwrr~r.~w~~~~~~rw~~1~~1~r~~~r gr~rww~?
00 RUEAIIS
ZNY CCCCC ZOC STATE ZZH
STU5394
00 RUEMC RUEHDD,
DE RUFHNA #0230/01 0121744
ZNY CCCCC ZZM
0 121741Z JAN 83
_ -. FM . USMISSION USNATO
TO RUEMC/$EC$TATE WASHDC'?IMMEDIATE.2518
INFO RUEKJC$1SECDEF WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEHLD/AMEMBA$$Y.LONDON IMMEDIATE3562
RUEMDDINATO.COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
EUROPEAN POLADSCOLLECTIVEPRIORITY
RUEMMO/AMEMSA$SY MOSCOW 1979
8T
C 0 N F I 0 E N T I A L USNATO 00230
GENEVA FOR USINF
E.O.
123561
DELL: OADR
TAGS;
PARM
MNUC?.UK? URr NATO
$UBJ:
INF:
UK =REPORT. ON SOVIET = DEMARCHE .ON GENEVA
INF ':NEGOTIATIONS..
REF: (A) USNATO'0156, (0) USNATO 0030
CONFIDENTIAL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/01: CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/01: CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
CONFIDENTIAL
STATE
w ~r+l~w+.wr,~ nrN.ww+~ www~~r...wn+w}~!r*~r*~ ~r w+gl~~Mww~~r+l~wwww~a w.T ?.~~rw1~~~r~"~sww~.wa~!l~w,r.w ~r~r~.. ~.r~+-?r.-
83 0262935 SCO PAGE 002
..., TORT 1a175TZxJAN}S3
.w?w.nwwww+?wu~...simw~w4wwwwwlp *"am www~.w##wwwwwVwwwwwwww
NC 026a935
~w~~~~!-~ilb~-www.gr~-?~1*w!-1~ wwl~~
'CONFIDENTIAL ENTIRE TEXT.
2. BEGIN SUMMARY. UK HAS CIRCULATED TO.SCG.ALLIES AT
NATO A SUMMARY REPORT OF THE :GALL BY 'SOVIET =CHARGE
IN LONDON-ON UK MINISTER OF STATE HURD DECEMBER 21
TO DISCUSS ,THE THIRD ROUND OF THE GENEVA _iINF
NEGOTIATIONS., UK,.REPORT. TEXT _OF WHICH 13 BELOW,
INDICATES THE SOVIET APPROACH IS"'ALONG,THE,6INES OF>
SIMILAR DEMARCHES REPORTED EARLIER BY THE=GERMANS
AND BELGIANS (REFTLLS).. ME 30VIIT. APPROACH REPORTED
,RA 51 THE NEED- TO INCLUDE :AIRCRAFT
BELOW EMPHASIZES CPA
IN THE INF .NEGOTIATIONS AND DOES NOTw INCLUDE REFERENCE
TO THE SOVIET MISSILE SUB.CEILING OFFER. HOWEVER
THIS MAY REFLECT THE FACT-THAT THE DEMARCHE TOOK
PLACE ON DECEMBER 21. THE SAME DAY ANDROPOV.WENT
PUBLIC WITH THESUBCEILING OFFER. 'UK MINISTER OF*
STATE HURD, IN REJECTING THE SOVIET POSITION.ON
INCLUSION OF UK~IFRENCH FORCES IN THENEGOTIATIONS#
COMMENTS THAT DURING THE SALT TALKS, THE SOVIETS
HAD INSISTED UK/FRENCH NUQILEAR FORCES WERE STRATEGIC
AND ;IT WAS ;THEREFORE . DIFFICULT 1O UNDERSTAND WHY THE
SOVIETS WERE, NOW TRYING ,TO INCLUDE THEM IN THE 'INF
NEGOTIATIONS, END!SUMMARY*
3. BEGIN. UK TEXTS
CALL ON MINISTER OF
21 DECEMBER 1982
PRESENTS
STATE BYJHE SOVIET CHARGES
MR. HURD
MR. LAMPORT
MR. FULLER (DEFENCE DEPT.)
MR. DOLGOV
INTERPRETER
1. MR. DOLGOV SAID THAT HE HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED TO
INFORM THE PRIME MINISTER, THROUGH THE MINISTER, 'ABOUT
CONFIDENTIAL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/01: CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/01: CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
CONFIDENTIAL
STATE
83 0262935
00 +-wmwwoo* w*"w+pwloww10w~-iAr+lA +~r~+F ws r.ilwll~~~ *+Ir+l~wr~r~ ~?
SCO
PAGE 043 NC: 0362935
?w~~www1-~w?
?wwwwww~rw9w~+~+iA~ww~'~'wwwwwo~www~www~~i~ri-w~1~~1-www~A-ww~~rN4w~~r~~~'~w!Il~w+~++~r*~wd~??~w~rw~r.r
THE ROUND OF IINF TALKS WHICH :TOOK PLACE BETWEEN :30
SEPTEMBER AND 30 NOVEMBER, HE READ THE FOLLOWING
ACCOUNT FROM HIS INSTRUCTIONS*
2. THE SOVIET. GOVERNMENT CONTINUED TO MAZE THE MOST
SERIOUS EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ANIINFEFFECTIVE
-WAY TO ATTAIN THE OBJECTIVE OF THE NEGOTIATIOt.. IT
WAS THE PROBLEMS IN.EUROPE WHICH WERE.SPECIALLY URGENT
AND IMMEDIATE. (HERE MR DOLGOV REAERRED TO THE
POSSIBILITIES, OF '"ANOTHER CIRCLE OF PARTICIPANTS").
DURING .THE :INF .NEGOTIATIONS' ;THE AMERICANS HAD MADE
NOT ONE -STEP FORWARD 'F*OM THEIR ORIGINAL; POSITION.
THE ZERO OPTION WAS UNREALISTIC AND'':TOTALLY'UNACCEPTABLE
TO THE SOVIET UNION. BY STICKING 104T THE AMERICANS
PROVED THAT THEY WERE NOT SERIOUS IN .THEIR DESIRE FOR ;THE
TALKS TO BE SUCCESSFUL.i THEY WANTED ONLY TO. DEPLOY
THEIR MEDIUM RANGE NUCLEAR FORCES INEUROPE. ANY
AGREEMENT , MUST .5E ON THE BASIS OF EQUALITY SAND . EQUAL
SECURITY. AMERICAN INSISTENCE ON THE ZERO OPTION WAS
LEADING TO FRUITLESS MARKING OF TIME ?AT THE. TALKS.
THE SOVIET UNION WISHED BRITAIN TO DRAW RELEVANT
,'CONCLUSIONS,
7, MR, HURD THANKED MR, DOLGOV FOR A LONG AND CLEAR
CONFIDENTIAL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/01: CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
PAGE 004 NC. 0262935
03
TORA Id1757ZJAN
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/01: CIA-RDP85M00363R000300460013-9
CONFIDENTIAL
STATE
s~?w???? ?wF+. ?~ws~w~~~? .a- ?~A~r~~r~r~M A+A~wq~1~-sgr+M~l~w wi~~t~~- ~~r~r~r~~~w ~*il~r~~r*~??? . ~~r
83 0262935 SCO
TOR1 1 jat?5TZ ..J*N .:a3
?gDwomsww4rw"mww?W"wave*m*" +~r~rs~-~rlr+ rli+~w~- ' wo-w 00-0404 a
ANALYSIS OF THE SOVIET- P05ITION . IT WAS