PART I OF 'IMMEDIATE INTEREST
Tbe main purpose ofspeech ln East Berlin onay probably was toassurances that, despite the breakdown of the Paris talks and the Soviet premier's intention to continue harshon the United States, the USSR does not plan to abandon Its peaceful coexistence lino and revertard, postur'e toward the West.
Apparently hoping toas much of his detente pol loy as possible, Khrushchev stated he assumed that another heads-of-government conference would take place in six to eight months. He repeated pub-
USSR would Tg in the lntorlm that might "aggravate thosituation and take us back to the dark time of the cold war."
On the key Issue ofKhrushchev emphasized he had reached agreement with East Gorman leaders that nomoves would be takenurther effort could be made to reach agreement ateace treaty with the two German states. Although he claimed that the failure of the Paris meeting gave themoral right" to proceedeparate treaty with East Germany, heualified guarantee of the status quo on condition that the Westernvould be willing to avoid "any unilateral steps" which wouldeeting in six to eight months.
The general line ofspeech suggests that he feels the necessity ofthat his detente policy ln recent months was justified and remains valid. He rocalled that afterfrom his visit to the United States he had warned thatEisenhower was in aposition"esulthidden struggle" there between the "forces of the cold war" and the "advocates of peaceful coexistence." observed that he had recognized speeches by USas "alarm signals','; he Implied thatncident resulted fron the victory of the "cold-war forces."
Moscow's handling of the7 aircraft incidentthat the Soviet leaders used lt as an opportunity to demonstrate the more moderate position taken by Khrushchev in Berlin. In contrast to previous Incidents in East Germany, ln which the East Germans' became involved, the Soviet authorities retained control of the aircraft and personnel and, after a. pro forma exchange of communications with American officials,the plane onay.propaganda noted the-only briefly and without coiwnont.
lence thus far supports the view that there will be noreorientation of Soviet policy but that the Sovietwas caught off balance by the American announcement
tbat overflights were part of US policy^TheSovlet minister counseloripparently acting under Instructions, expressed his belief toofflolals that US-Soviet relations would Improve soon, that negotiations could be"at anynd that Khrushchev has only theregard" for President.
ii, orter that thrtvents in Parisno "basio change" inpolicy. He also claimed thatncident would have devoloped differently if the US had taken advantage of the "open door" inay speech which offered the President an opportunity tohimself from the
GenevaNuclear Test Talks
slon that tho USSR was prepared to continue serious negotiations on the main issuesest ban treaty. He indicated,that Moscow had doubts rdine American intentions.
Lntlmated willingness continue in either formal or informal meetings beginning onay.
On speoif ic_ issues,
ia quota ofn-site inspections would be too high andoratorium
on small underground tests for two years would be too short. Ho stressed that parity on the control commission was morethan the preciseand indicatedompromise might be possible on the composition of the on-site inspection teams.
In his opening speech at the UN Security Council meeting onay, Gromyko showed that Moscow Intends to pressits campaign to discredit the United States and divide world opinion onffair. Gromyko touched on the points made previously by Khrushchev and the official memorandum of complaint ttd the Securitybefore Introducing acalling for condemnation of the US incursions asacts and for the adoption of measures to halt such actions and prohibit them ln the future.
Soviet tactics apparently are designed to maintain intact the position taken by Khrushchev in insistingirectof the overflights
CURRENT INTELLIGENCE WEEKLY SUMMARY0
than seeking an eventual compromise resolutionould be represented as ruling out future overflights. Gromykos reported determination to move to the General Assembly if the US does not apologize forncident also suggests that Moscow's primary aim is to focus attention on the incident over the next few months.
In an unsuccessful attempt to forestall the tablingesolution sponsored by four of the nonpermanent members of the Security Council urging moderation,ew summit
imed privately that Gronytfo "heatedly" rejected It on the grounds It wpuld Increase The |
hint thatesolution might have "some value" ln two or three months' time was also probably designed to discourage >ductlon of the resolution,
would attompt to amendTTIis resolution to include aof .overflights.
Khrushchev's activities since returning to Moscowno additional evidence on the future course of his foreign policy. Khrushchev did notublic statement at theand passed up the usual major speech at Luzhniki Stadium, fie reportedly will give his speechorkers' conference onay.
Khrushchev's relatively moderate tone in outlining his future course of action in his Berlin speech will displease
critics ln the Communist world who opposed his peacefuldiplomacy andhis performance ln Paris asomplete abandonment of this line. His postponementeparate poace treaty caused visibletoast German party officials who, shortly before, had loudly cheered his remark that he would not wait much longer toreaty.
American officials who viewed the performance on TV noted that even party boss Walter Ulbrlcht was somewhat reluctant, both in manner and words, to accept the Later Ulbrlcht presented an extenslye"list ;of demands for eliminating Western troops and activities in Berlin. The release of7 aircraft may Intensify the feeling of regime leaders that East German claims to sovereignty are being sacrificed to tho expediencies of Khrushchev's policies.
The Poles are reportedly delighted by the Khrushchev speech in Berlin, which they seeirect rebuff to Peiping has not yet commented on Khrushchev'sspeech; the Chinese leaders may well view It as confirming their suspicions that he will not maintain an uncompromising attitude toward the West.*
Peiping's largest and most acrimonious Anti-Americansince the Lebanon crisis8 apparently ended onay. The Chinesethe United States and personally castigated President Elsenhower in language even more Intemperate than Khrushchev'i at Paris. The demonstrations
concealed Peiping'sover the breakdown of the Paris meetings and becamemore anti-American than pro-Soviet. In contrast to othor bloc commentary,has made noossible future summit conference.
Wostern European Views
Following its Initial shock at the breakdown of the summit meeting, Western Europeanis turningore searching assessment of the causes of the conferenceand the outlook for future East-West relations. Moatcontinue to blamefor wrecking the Ev
causticfflight, charged Khrushchev with "spit-ting in the face ofhere remains, however, aundercurrent ofof American handling ofpisode ln relation to subsequent events at the
Some feeling is expressed that the United Statesthe interests of its smaller allies. The Norwegian Air Force, in granting landing clearance onay for aUS training flight from
Iceland, stated that clearance would require acceptance of the limitation that the plane would not go east ofegrees oast longitude, either over Norway or international waters. Oslo had stated that NATO flights would "notbe cleared" east of the same line but made no reference to international waters.
The Danish defense minister,ossible move to ward off future Soviet charges,arliamentary committee onay that Denmark would notAmerican bases in Greonland to be used for reconnaissance^ flights over tho USSR. Maammma mP0|the Danish Government poin^Sdly complained about the lack of caution ln the flight from Copenhagen onay of tho US transport plane forced down ln East Germany.
A period of higher tension is generally expected to follow the summit collapse, although most West Europeans believeajor European crisis la not imminent. Chancellor Adenauor has asserted that recent events have vindicated his stand againsterlin settlement. His call for strengtheningunity has been widely voiced ln opposition as well ascircles throughout Western Europe.
Reactions among the Arab states vary widely in theof blame attributed to the US or USSR, but all show deep disappointment over the summit breakdown and fear of extremo international tension to come. Naslr is reported to believe that, while the US blundered soriously ln its
ofncident, Khrushchev badly overplayed his hand ln Paris and Elsenhower's restraint helped salvageprestige.
Jordan's foreign minister, expressing admiration forcandor onsaid he had beenbut Khrushchev would have accepted the"transparent honesty" and closed the matter. The prime minister of Lebanonthat, in view of thethen prevailing, the summit conference should have been postponed before it Following several days of quarreling between the pro-Communist and nationalist press ln Iraq as to who wasfor the summit failure, the emphasis has shifted to the need for "redoubled efforts by the peace-loving nations" to check the dangers of increasing world tensions.
Officials ln Libya and Saudi Arabia havo expressednervousness over the summit breakdown and Khrushchev's threats against American bases abroad. Turkish comment has been favorable to the United -States, although Turkishhas been Halted by the fact that political leaders and the press are preoccupied with domestic problems. Iranianhas been generallyto the US,but there has been little official comment or editorializing. The.Ete_laat, which usually reflectsof the Iranian Government, blamos the breakup of the summit on the USSR.
The government party press in Tunisia has taken thethat the US could notwith the Soviet demand for an apology, but that the plane incident cast doubt on American desires to preserve the peace. Ghana's Prime Minister Nkruraah, claiming to be speaking onof the small nations of the world, questioned the right of the "big four" to settle the world's problems. Ethiopia's controlled press blamed the USSR for giving undue Importance to the plane incident andirresponsibly in breaking up the summit. LlberianTubman blamed the USiolation of International law, but his tone indicated he believed the U3 was Justified.
South and Southeast Asia
Reaction in South Asia generally has been moro realistic than on similar occasions ln the past. Nehru's comment has been cautious. He carefullyfrom pinning the blame for the summit "fiasco" on either side, and similarly refused to condemnncident until the facts are known. Inissued after visiting Kaslr and Menderes, Nehruthe failure at Paris, and hoped the big powers would tryhe communiques also suggested that some move to "help" was underalthough ln Ankara onay Nehru specifically ruled out personal mediation.
In Pakistan, Ayub has made It clear where hia sympathies lie, noting that "today the free world must live under anof American nuclearThe government-monitored press, however, is beginning to put more blame for tho world crisis on the US. Afghanistan's government-controlled press has
flailed the "aggressive"and actions of the US and Pakistan.
Official reaction inAsia has been moderate. The earliest theme in widespread pressover the setback to hopes of worldway to almostcondemnation oftaatics at Paris. Most recently, however, bothand official comment has tended to pass over the whole summit debacle and concentrate on hopes for future conferences and new effortsetente.
Lat in America
In the limited reaction from Latin America, thean Republic, Peru, andhighlight Khrushchev's responsibility for the confer-once failure, whilein Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, andave been critical of the United States in varying dogrees. From Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, and
Peru came suggestions that tho smaller powers can help to calm tensions between the greatEcuador and Argentina are trying to do as members of the UN Security Council. Cuban comment tends to follow theline.
An attitudeplague on both your houses" is evident in much of the area. osta Rican radio commentary likened the "highly touted"athering of "any four street urchins." Mexican writers have stated that Mexico and Latin America in general were fortunate to be out of tho "insanity ofrazilian Foreign Ministry official has privately expressed concern lest the United States lose Its moral authority as leader of the Western alliance. In Chile, criticisms of U3 leadership were the sharpest in recent years, and even President Al-essandri reportedly expressod disappointment at Western strategy. *"Original document.