“No annihilation without representation”: NATO nuclear use decision-making during the Cold War

ABSTRACT

Scholars focused on NATO nuclear strategy during the Cold War have devoted little attention to the dynamics of how the Alliance would decide to use nuclear weapons. This article aims to fill this gap by examining the internal debates about how a nuclear use decision would be taken, particularly balancing the desire to ensure adequate consultation of the non-nuclear members without undermining the credibility of NATO’s nuclear deterrent by giving them a veto. To avoid undermining Alliance cohesion, the nuclear use decision process was kept deliberately vague, despite the problems that would almost certainly have arisen in a war.

KEYWORDS:

• NATO
• nuclear strategy
• nuclear use
• Cold War
• flexible response

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

¹ Within this vast literature, the key work dealing with policies and concepts is Beatrice Heuser´s, NATO, Britain, France and the FRG: Nuclear Strategies and Forces for Europe, 1949–2000 (London: Palgrave 1997). Very few works specifically refer to NATO nuclear use decision-making processes. Among them are Shaun R. Gregory’s, Nuclear Command and Control in NATO: Nuclear Weapons Operations and the Strategy of Flexible Response (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996) as well as Daniel Charles’s ‘Who Controls NATO’s Nuclear Weapons’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 31/4 (1985), 45–47. However, Gregory and Charles had limited access to declassified documents. Timothy A. Sayle’s ‘A Nuclear Education: The Origins of NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group’, Journal of Strategic Studies 43/6–7 (2020), utilizes extensive documentation but only covers the period up to the 1966 creation of the Nuclear Planning Group.

² For example: Jeffrey G. Lewis and Bruno Tertrais, ‘The Finger on the Button: The Authority to Use Nuclear Weapons in Nuclear-Armed States’, CNS Occasional Paper #45, February 2019; Ashton B. Carter, John D. Steinbruner and Charles A. Zraket, Managing Nuclear Operations (Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1987).

³ NATO. Declaration on Atlantic Relations issued by the North Atlantic Council. June 19, 1974. Text available at: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_26901.htm?

⁴ The North Atlantic Treaty, Washington D.C., 4 April 1949, NATO Archives (NA).

⁵ Sherrod L. Bumgardner, ‘Article 4 of the North Atlantic Treaty’, Emory International Law Review 71 (2019), 71–73.

⁶ Frederic L. Kirgis Jr., ‘NATO Consultations as a Component of National Decisionmaking’, American Journal of International Law 73 (1979), 372–406.

⁷ Frank Costigliola, ‘Kennedy, the European Allies, and the Failure to Consult’, Political Science Quarterly 110/1 (1995), 105–123.

⁸ The North Atlantic Treaty, 1949.

⁹ Ibid.

¹⁰ Cited in Matthew Jones, ‘Great Britain, the United States, and Consultation over Use of the Atomic Bomb, 1950–1954’, The Historical Journal 54/3 (2011), 820.

¹¹ Lester B. Pearson, ‘Canada in the World Today’, 15 March 1954. Thanks to Timothy A. Sayle for bringing this speech to my attention.

¹² Ibid.

¹³ Klaus Knorr, ‘A NATO Nuclear Force: The Problem of Management’, Policy Memorandum No. 26, Center of International Studies, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, February 5. 1963, Digital National Security Archive (DNSA).

¹⁴ Ibid.

¹⁵ Frank Costigliola, ‘The Failed Design: Kennedy, de Gaulle, and the Struggle for Europe’, Diplomatic History 8/3 (1984), 235.

¹⁶ Knorr, ‘A NATO Nuclear Force’.

¹⁷ Jonathan Søborg Agger and Lasse Wolsgaard. ‘All Steps Necessary: Danish Nuclear Policy, 1949–1960’, Contemporary European History 15/1 (2006), 75.

¹⁸ For background on these agreements, see: Memorandum from Merchant to Secretary of State Christian Herter, January 9, 1961, enclosing ‘Understandings with the British on the Use of British Bases and Nuclear Weapons’, National Security Archive (NSA). Available at: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB159/usukconsult-12.pdf.

¹⁹ Articles of Agreement Governing Collaboration Between the Authorities of the USA and the UK in the Matter of Tube Alloys, August 19, 1943. Text available at: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/q003.asp#1.

²⁰ Jones, ‘Great Britain, the United States, and Consultation’, 801.

²¹ Memorandum from Merchant to Secretary of State Christian Herter, 1961.

²² Letter from President Johnson to Prime Minister Wilson, 11 November 1965, with attached routing memoranda, NSA. Available at: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB159/usukconsult-24a.pdf.

²³ Ibid.

²⁴ State Department cable 203,272 to U.S. Embassy London, ‘Nuclear Consultation with the British’, 15 December 1970, NSA. Available at: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB159/usukconsult-30.pdf.

²⁵ Jones, ‘Great Britain, the United States, and Consultation’, 803.

²⁶ Memorandum of Conversation, “Briefing of Joint Committee on Atomic Energy Staff on Defense Issues at NATO Athens Meeting,” 10 May 1962, Secret, DNSA.

²⁷ Timothy Andrews Sayle, ‘A Pattern of Constraint: Canadian-American Relations in the Early Cold War’, International Journal, Vol. 62, No. 3, 2007, pp. 689–705.

²⁸ Memorandum of Conversation by the Special Assistant to the Secretary of State (Arneson), 12 May 1951, FRUS, 1951, National Security Affairs; Foreign Economic Policy, Vol. 1.

²⁹ Memorandum of Conversation by the Special Assistant to the Secretary of State (Arneson), 14 June 1951, Enclosure: Note Prepared by the Canadian Embassy, FRUS, 1951, National Security Affairs; Foreign Economic Policy, Vol. 1.

³⁰ EUR – William R. Tyler through Executive Secretariat to the Secretary, “Atomic Stockpile Negotiations with Italy,” 3 October 1961, Secret, NSA; U.S. Embassy Italy Despatch 525 to State Department, “Transmitting Documents Constituting Military Atomic Stockpile and ‘Consent’ Agreements,” 17 January 1962, Secret, NSA; Letter from Rusk to McNamara, October 9, 1961, NSA.

³¹ U.S. Embassy Rome Airgram G-922 to Department of State, 29 June 1961, NSA. Available at: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/documents/us-nuclear-presence-western-europe-1954–1962-part-ii/12.pdf?pdf=722-12.

³² State Department telegram 257 to U.S. Embassy Italy, 27 July 1961, NSA. Available at: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/documents/us-nuclear-presence-western-europe-1954–1962-part-ii/13.pdf?pdf=722-13.

³³ U.S. Embassy Italy Despatch 525 to State Department, “Transmitting Documents Constituting Military Atomic Stockpile and ‘Consent’ Agreements,” 17 January 1962, NSA. Available at: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/documents/us-nuclear-presence-western-europe-1954–1962-part-ii/18.pdf?pdf=722-18.

³⁴ Heuser, NATO, Britain, France and the FRG, 138.

³⁵ Memorandum for the President, “Consultations with the Federal Republic of Germany on Nuclear Weapons Release,” 16 March 1968. Available at: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB159/usukconsult-25a.pdf.

³⁶ Ibid.

³⁷ Cable from American Embassy Bonn to SECSTATE, 031720ZJUL72, Subject: NPG and Nuclear Release Procedures, National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

³⁸ Heuser, NATO, Britain, France and the FRG, 139.

³⁹ Annex E, ‘Anglo-German Consultation Arrangements About Nuclear Release’, Robert Armstrong to Prime Minister, “Nuclear Release Procedures and Related Matters,” June 1983, Top Secret, Excised Copy, CAB 196/124. Accessed at: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/23835-robert-armstrong-prime-minister-nuclear-release-procedures-and-related-matters-june.

⁴⁰ Ibid.

⁴¹ Ibid.

⁴² Frédéric Bozo, ‘The Sanctuary and the Glacis: France, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Nuclear Weapons in the 1980s (Part I)’, Journal of Cold War Studies 22/3 (2020), 119–179.

⁴³ Frédéric Bozo, ‘The Sanctuary and the Glacis: France, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Nuclear Weapons in the 1980s (Part II)’, Journal of Cold War Studies 22/4 (2020), 175–228.

⁴⁴ Cabinet, “Nuclear Defence Policy, Minutes of a Meeting Held in 10 Downing Street on Tuesday, 8 March 1983, at 4:30 p.m.,” MISC 7 (83) 2nd Meeting, Top Secret, CAB 130/1224. Accessed at. https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/23833-cabinet-nuclear-defense-policy-minutes-meeting-held-10-downing-street-tuesday-8

⁴⁵ Ibid.

⁴⁶ Ibid.

⁴⁷ Ibid.

⁴⁸ Ibid.

⁴⁹ Ibid.

⁵⁰ Ibid.

⁵¹ This updated agreement on ‘Procedural Understandings on the Release for Use of United States Nuclear Weapons Based in the United Kingdom’ was signed by Oliver Wright (UK) and Lawrence Eagleburger (US) on 17 May 1983. Robert Armstrong to Prime Minister, “Nuclear Release Procedures and Related Matters,” June 1983, NSA.

⁵² United States Senate, Report of the Special Committee on Nuclear Weapons in the Atlantic Alliance. A Report to the Committee on Foreign Relations, January 1, 1985 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office 1985), 15.

⁵³ ‘Political authority for use of atomic weapons by NATO forces’, US Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary for International Security Affairs, Secret, Memorandum, 7 April 1958, DNSA: Nuclear History I, 1955–1968.

⁵⁴ Statement by the Secretary of State to the North Atlantic Council Closed Ministerial Session, Paris, April 23, 1954, FRUS, 1952–1954, Western European Security, Vol. 5, Part 1.

⁵⁵ ‘Political Authority for Use of Atomic Weapons by NATO Forces’, NATO Defense Ministers Conference, Paris, 15–18 April 1958, OASD, 7 April 1958, NSA.

⁵⁶ Speech of Secretary of State John Foster Dulles before the Council on Foreign Relations, 12 January 1954.

⁵⁷ ‘The Most Effective Pattern of NATO Military Strength for the Next Few Years’, MC 48(Final) − 22 November 1954, NA.

⁵⁸ 740.5/4–2454, Statement by the Secretary of State to the North Atlantic Council Closed Ministerial Session, Paris, April 23, 1954, Paris, 23 April 1954, FRUS, 1952–1954, Western European Security, Vol. V, Part 1.

⁵⁹ Record of Meeting of the Standing Group, 2 September 1954, SG 210–54, NA.

⁶⁰ See statement by French representative in: Record of Meeting of the Standing Group, 12 August 1954, SG 209–54, NA.

⁶¹ NATO, Final Communiqué, 16 December 1957, NA.

⁶² Ibid.

⁶³ Lawrence Freedman and Jeffrey Michaels, The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy, 4th Edition (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019), 361–372.

⁶⁴ NATO, MC 14/2(Revised)(Final Decision), A Report by the Military Committee on Overall Strategic Concept for the Defense of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Area, 23 May 1957, NA.

⁶⁵ Address by Secretary of Defense McNamara at the Ministerial Meeting of the North Atlantic Council, Athens, 5 May 1962, FRUS, 1961–1963, Vol. VIII, National Security Policy.

⁶⁶ Sayle, ‘A Nuclear Education’, 928.

⁶⁷ Heusinger referred to this in 1960. Ibid., p. 928 FN 31.

⁶⁸ Statement of the United States Permanent Representative to the North Atlantic Council, May 26, 1961 on Defense Matters. Available at the Eisenhower Library online archive. Accessed at: https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/sites/default/files/research/online-documents/declassified/fy-2012/1961-05-26.pdf.

⁶⁹ Ibid.

⁷⁰ Dirk Stikker, ‘Annual political appraisal special report by the Secretary General on NATO defence policy’, 17 April 1962, NSA. Available at: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB159/usukconsult-16a.pdf.

⁷¹ Memorandum from Secretary of Defense for the President, Subject: Consultation in NATO on Nuclear Weapon Use, 5 May 1969, Declassified Documents Online (DDO).

⁷² Ibid.

⁷³ Ibid.

⁷⁴ ‘Considerations Influencing the Transfer, Release and Use of Nuclear Weapons’. Department of Defense. 6 July 1962. DDO.

⁷⁵ Ibid.

⁷⁶ Memorandum from Gen. Taylor to President Kennedy, 2 July 1962, FRUS, 1961–1963, Volumes VII, VIII, IX, Arms Control; National Security Policy; Foreign Economic Policy, Microfiche Supplement, Doc. 274.

⁷⁷ Sayle, ‘A Nuclear Education’, 931–932.

⁷⁸ NPG Consultation, US Mission to NATO, Secret, Cable, 17 March 1969, DNSA.

⁷⁹ Overall Strategic Concept for the Defense of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Area, MC 14/3(Final), 16 January 1968, NA.

⁸⁰ Ibid.

⁸¹ Ibid.

⁸² J. Michael Legge, ‘Theater Nuclear Weapons and the NATO Strategy of Flexible Response’, RAND R-2964FF, April 1983.

⁸³ Memorandum from Secretary of Defense for the President, Subject: ‘Consultation in NATO on Nuclear Weapons Use’, 5 May 1969, DNSA.

⁸⁴ Ibid.

⁸⁵ Memorandum for the Standing Group, 9 March 1960, SGWM-140-60, NA.

⁸⁶ Memorandum for the Norwegian Military Representative, 24 March 1960, SGM-181-60, NA.

⁸⁷ Ibid.

⁸⁸ Department of State Telegram, 131807Z Dec 68, Subject: NPG – Consultation, DNSA.

⁸⁹ Department of State Telegram, 201927ZDec 68, Subject: NPG-Consultation, DNSA.

⁹⁰ Ibid.

⁹¹ ‘Nuclear Planning Group: US position on consultation on nuclear weapons use’, US National Security Council Staff, Position Paper, 4 April 1969, DNSA.

⁹² Ibid.

⁹³ Memorandum from Secretary of Defense for the President, 5 May 1969, DNSA.

⁹⁴ Ibid.

⁹⁵ Ibid.

⁹⁶ Ibid.

⁹⁷ Memorandum of Conversation, Meeting of Secretary Laird with the Secretary General of NATO, 14 February 1969, FRUS, 1969–1976, Vol. XLI, Western Europe; NATO, 1969–1972.

⁹⁸ Ibid.

⁹⁹ Ibid.

¹⁰⁰ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, Subject: May 16 NPG PERM REPS Meeting, 170845Z May 74.

¹⁰¹ Testimony of General Bernard Rogers Before the US Senate, Committee on Armed Services, Department of Defense Authorization for Appropriation for FY83, 97th Congress, 2nd Session, Part 7, Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces, February-March 1982, 4334.

¹⁰² Ibid.

¹⁰³ Ibid.

¹⁰⁴ Robert Armstrong to Prime Minister, ‘Nuclear Release Procedures and Related Matters’.

¹⁰⁵ Report of the Special Committee on Nuclear Weapons in the Atlantic Alliance, 1985.

¹⁰⁶ Ibid.

¹⁰⁷ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 261910ZMar74, Subject: 25 March NPG Staff Group Meeting, NARA. This issue also arose at Fallex 68. See NAC Participation in Fallex 68, IMSWM-105-68, 29 April 1968, NA.

¹⁰⁸ Ibid.

¹⁰⁹ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 121530ZAPR75, Subject: NPG PERMREPS Report on WINTEX-75, NARA.

¹¹⁰ CAB 130/801, UK National Archives.

¹¹¹ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 181745Z APR 75, Subject: Council Operations Exercise Commitee Meeting, April 17, 1975, NARA.

¹¹² Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 081500ZAPR77, Subject: WINTEX 77 Critique, NARA.

¹¹³ Exercise Able Archer 83: Information from SHAPE Historical Files, March 28, 2013, NSA. Available at: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB427/docs/6.a.%20Exercise%20Able%20Archer%20SHAPE%20March%202013%20NATO.pdf.

¹¹⁴ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 181745ZAPR75, Subject: Council Operations Exercise Committee meeting, 17 April 1975, NARA.

¹¹⁵ J.B. Carne, ‘SACEUR’s selective release procedures and nuclear policy decisions’, D -18,273-ISA, RAND, 26 December 1968. Available at: https://www.archives.gov/files/2011-013-doc01.pdf.

¹¹⁶ Cable from USMISSION NATO to SECSTATE, 021815ZOCT74, Subject: Draft NPG PermReps Report on the Study on Communicating NATO’s Intention to Use Nuclear Weapons, NARA.

¹¹⁷ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 071424ZMAY77, Subject: NPG: Ambassador Pauls Remarks at May 5 NPG Permrep Meeting, NARA.

¹¹⁸ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 161710ZOCT75, Subject: NPG: CNI: Messages of Warning, NARA.

¹¹⁹ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 121600ZDEC75, Subject: NPG – Comments on Hamburg Ministerial Agenda, NARA; Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 111740ZSEP74, Subject: September 9 NPG Staff Group Meeting, NARA.

¹²⁰ Cable from US Mission to NATO to SECSTATE, 132055ZSEP74, Subject: September 13 NPG Staff Group Meeting, NARA.

¹²¹ Notes of WINTEX 83 Senior Level First Impressions Conference, 22 Mar 1983 and related documents, NSA. Available at. https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB427/docs/2.Notes%20of%20WINTEX%2083,%2022%20March%201983,%20and%20related.pdf

¹²² The text can be found at: https://nuke.fas.org/control/prevent/text/prevent1.htm.

¹²³ Cable from AMEMBASSY Bonn to SECSTATE, 051812ZJUL73, Subject: Discussion with Defense Minister Leber on Defense Matters, NARA.

¹²⁴ Cable from USMISSION NATO to SECSTATE, 021855ZJUL74, Subject: NPG Study on Communicating NATO’s Intentions to Use Nuclear Weapons, NARA.

¹²⁵ Cable from SECSTATE to all NATO Capitals, 22316ZJUN73, Subject: Agreement on Prevention of Nuclear War, NARA.

¹²⁶ Cable from SECSTATE to all Diplomatic Posts, 221659ZJUN73, Subject: Agreement on Prevention of Nuclear War, NARA.

¹²⁷ Stephen R. Twigge, ‘Operation Hullabaloo: Henry Kissinger, British Diplomacy, and the Agreement for the Prevention of Nuclear War’, Diplomatic History 33/4 (2009), 689–701.

¹²⁸ KGB Headquarters Moscow, to the London KGB Residency, ‘Permanent operational assignment to uncover NATO preparations for a nuclear missile attack on the USSR’, and enclosed documents, February 17, 1983, NSA. Available at. https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB426/docs/9.Permanent%20Operational%20assignment%20to%20uncover%20NATO%20preparations%20for%20a%20nuclear%20missile%20attack%20on%20the%20USSR-February%202,%201983.pdf

¹²⁹ Ibid.

¹³⁰ Ibid.

¹³¹ Ibid.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jeffrey H. Michaels

Jeffrey H. Michaels is the IEN Senior Fellow in American Foreign Policy and International Security at the Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals (IBEI). He also holds Visiting Fellowships with the Department of War Studies, King's College London and the Changing Character of War Centre, Pembroke College, Oxford. Earlier experience included working as a Senior Lecturer in Defence Studies at King’s, as well as serving as an official with NATO and the US Defense Department. He is the co-author, with Sir Lawrence Freedman, of The Evolution of Nuclear Strategy (4th Edition).