On October 1, 1962, N.S. Khrushchev met with a delegation from India’s Gandhi Peace Foundation to discuss nuclear disarmament and ongoing arms negotiations. The delegation presented concerns about nuclear testing and urged the Soviet Union to take unilateral steps toward disarmament. Khrushchev responded that while the USSR was willing to sign an agreement to halt nuclear testing, the United States' refusal to accept verification measures and continued military expansion made such an agreement difficult. The conversation also covered US foreign policy, Soviet-Indian relations, and global security issues.

In a meeting between Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev and Finnish President Mauno Koivisto on March 9, 1982, both leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the 1948 Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Aid, emphasizing the strong and stable relations between their countries. They discussed economic cooperation, trade balance adjustments, and the importance of maintaining détente amid growing tensions between the US and the Soviet Union. Additionally, they exchanged views on international security, arms control, and the Madrid Conference, expressing mutual interest in continuing diplomatic collaboration and extending the treaty’s duration.

In this letter, Zhukov sets out how, from the Soviet perspective, the Soviets have been working towards peace but the deployment of Cruise and Pershing missiles in Western Europe derailed arms control talks in Geneva and has made the international situation markedly worse. He invites the CND to work with the Soviet Union "to further our common struggle for a nuclear-free Europe."

Bush, Kohl, and others discuss relations with France and France's views of NATO, talks between the US and the USSR over the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I), safeguarding the Brazilian rainforest, the Uruguay Round of the GATT, support for economic reforms in the Soviet Union, and US-German relations.

In July 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918-1970) nationalized the Suez Canal Company, surprising the world. The government of France, in whose capital of Paris the company was headquartered, and the British government, the company’s plurality shareholder, sought to reverse nationalization in court, but failed—even though they clad their case in the language not of imperial self-interest but, rather, of international public interest. The time in which such language was somewhat acceptable, even at home, was passing, and the Suez Crisis played a big part in this final act.

At the same time, the two governments early on after the canal nationalization decided to remove Nasser by force, for re-compensation was not their central concern. France believed Nasser was enabling the FLN, which in 1954 had started Algeria’s War for Independence, and Britain wanted some say in the canal, which had for decades been its worldwide empire’s “swing-door,” as a member of parliament, Anthony Eden (1897-1977), called it in 1929. In August 1956 France began discussing a joint operation with Israel, which wanted Nasser gone, too, and the Red Sea opened for Israel-bound ships. In early October the two were joined by Britain. On the 29th, Israel invaded the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula. On the 30th, France and Britain gave Israel and Egypt a 12-hour ultimatum to cease hostilities, or they would intervene—and Anglo-French forces bombed Egyptian forces from the 31st and on November 5-6 occupied the canal’s northern tip. Although a power play, “Operation Musketeer,” like the court case, could not be an open imperial move anymore, then, and did not present itself to the world as such. No matter: especially in colonies and postcolonial countries, people were outraged.

More problematically for France and Britain, Washington was incredulous. This Middle Eastern affair triggered the worst crisis of the 1950s between America’s rising international empire and Europe’s descending empires, and indeed clarified and accelerated that descent. President Dwight Eisenhower (1890-1969) fumed that Prime Ministers Anthony Eden and Guy Mollet (1905-1977) had disregarded his administration’s opposition to military action. Worse, they had deceived him about their intentions. And worst, their attack on Egypt undermined the supreme US tenet: Soviet containment. The Americans were by association tainted by their NATO allies’ imperialist move while the Soviets looked good—on November 5 they offered Egypt troops and threatened to nuke London, Paris, and Tel Aviv—and that although they had just repressed an uprising in Hungary.

On the very day of the ultimatum, October 30, Eisenhower washed his hands of that move on live US television, and the US mission at the UN organized a cease-fire resolution vote in the Security Council. France and Britain vetoed it. Although sharing its European allies’ emotions about Nasser, the US administration withheld critical oil and monetary supplies from them to bring them to heel and withdraw from Egypt—after which, it promised, they would be warmly welcomed back. It ceased most bilateral communications and froze almost all everyday social interactions with its two allies, even cancelling a scheduled visit by Eden. And it badgered its allies at the UN, supporting an Afro-Asian resolution that on November 24 called Israel, Britain, and France to withdraw forthwith. On December 3, the British Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd took the floor in the House of Commons.

In this document, N. S. Khrushchev provides wide-ranging comments on various geopolitical and diplomatic issues. He criticizes the US for holding onto outdated alliances like Taiwan, emphasizing the need to normalize relations and reduce tensions globally. Khrushchev discusses Middle Eastern instability, particularly in Iran, warning against U.S. interference and emphasizing self-determination for colonized nations. He also addresses disarmament, arguing that military bases are a source of tension and advocating for a phased withdrawal of troops and arms control measures. Additional topics include the complexities of summit diplomacy, Lend-Lease repayment disputes, and his correspondence with world leaders such as Macmillan, De Gaulle, and Nehru, stressing the importance of aligning messages to maintain good relations.

This document summary was generated by an artificial intelligence language model and was reviewed by a Wilson Center staff member.

This document contains a list of directives to the Soviet delegation at the 23rd Session of the UNGA which focus on a Soviet government memorandum that was submitted by the Soviet government for addition to the session's agenda. The initial directives instruct the delegation to emphasize the urgency that, to the Soviet government, befits the serious need to terminate the arms race and start making concrete steps towards disarmament. Later directives call attention to discussions held between the Soviet government and those of other socialist countries, as well as additions to the resolution of the UNGA proposed by Western countries that the Soviet government finds unacceptable. Nonetheless, the delegation is to bring the Memorandum to the attention of the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee (ENCD) for consideration.

Gromyko asks U Thant to include the "Memorandum of the Government of the USSR on Some Urgent Measures to End the Arms Race and Disarmament" on the agenda of the 23rd Session of the UNGA. He also extolls the signing of the NPT as an opportunity to create better conditions for the termination of the arms race and as a starting point for further international agreements on the issues of disarmament and the termination of the usage of nuclear weapons. Gromyko also asks Thant to share the Memorandum in the capacity of an official document on the UNGA.

This memo discusses several amendments proposed by various non-nuclear countries during the First Committee of the UNGA, and the Soviet delegation's amenability to adding amendments and clarifications to the NPT so long as the essence of the Treaty is not altered or undermined. Some of the topics of the proposed amendments include the strengthening of sharing nuclear technology and research on nuclear energy and other peaceful uses of the atom and international observation as it pertains to peaceful nuclear explosions. Attention is also paid to when further negotiations on peaceful nuclear explosions will take place, relaying the difference in Soviet and American opinions on what the optimal timing of those negotiations would be but, ultimately, the Soviet government's desire, first and foremost, to have the NPT go into effect as soon as possible.

The Soviet Union's response to George Marshall's September 17, 1947, speech at the UNGA. Vyshinsky offers the Soviet Union's position on arms control, nuclear weapons, the UN, Korea, Greece, and other issues raised by Marshall