Prime Minister Amintore Fanfani’s visit to the U.S. was an opportunity for he and President Kennedy to reach “a meeting of the minds” on the Jupiter-Polaris problem. The two had several conversations during the next two days on East-West relations, NATO nuclear issues, and the developing world, among other topics.  During this conversation, with only the U.S. translator present, Kennedy explained to Fanfani that Polaris/Sergeant missiles as a replacement for Jupiter/Corporals, along with Italian participation in an eventual MLF, should be announced as “whole package” rather than to have “the different points of decision simply leak out, without coherence and possibly at the wrong moment.” He believed that the main elements of the agreement would find “general approval” among most political groupings in Italy. When Fanfani brought up the possibility of announcing the U.S. request on Jupiters and Polaris and then taking it to his government, Kennedy emphasized the need for quick action, adding that it would “not be desirable to allow for prolonged discussion” of the package.

At Fanfani’s request, Kennedy explained the arrangements for Polaris missions in the Mediterranean, which operated out of a base in the Iberian Peninsula (Rota, Spain), and the various options for an MLF, either surface or submarine ships. Such an approach, Kennedy believed, was a way to improve the “position of the West.” Accepting Kennedy’s assertions about the dangers of the Jupiter missiles, Fanfani nevertheless saw a “psychological” problem involving the “prestige and strength” of Italy’s armed forces. Kennedy “indicated lively interest” in Fanfani’s question as to whether the Jupiter bases could be used for “cooperative peaceful space efforts.”

At the meeting’s conclusion, Kennedy “stressed that by the following morning they should be able to combine four or five points into a proposal that would strengthen the Italian and American position within the framework of the Alliance, thus making this meeting a gain in its cohesiveness and hence political strength.”

In an “eyes only” response to a State Department query about the Jupiters, U.S. Ambassador Raymond Hare observed that “if proper means could be found, good case could be made for removal of Jupiters from Turkey as counter for removal of Soviet missiles from Cuba.” Yet, withdrawing the missiles as part of a Cuban Missile Crisis arrangement would pose a problem that was “partly psycho-political” and “partly substantive.” With reference to the “psycho-political” problem, Hare’s explanation was framed ethnocentrically: The Turks “are proud, courageous people who do not understand concept or process of compromise.” In that context, the U.S. would lose much “if in process of Jupiter removal [the] Turks should get the impression that their interests as an ally were being traded off in order to appease an enemy.” He recommended several alternative solutions to the problem; for example, if the missiles are phased out, the U.S. could provide Turkey with a backup, such as the proposed Multilateral Force (MLF) or Polaris missiles. If Italy gave up its Jupiters, he suggests, that could help with an approach to Turkey. 

Note on FRG's position vis-à-vis the MLF particularly Defense Minister Von Hassel's position, as emerged in the course of debates over the FRG defense budget.

Note on MLF project elaborated by Paris standing group. It focuses on US project, British point of view, objectives of te ANF proposal, issues with the MLF and national ways to the nuclear deterrent.

Report by italian representative to the Atlantic Council A. Alessandrini on the second phase of MLF negotiations, particularly Italy's position.

Note on the current state of MFL project and positions of the parties involved. The paper mentions also the study presented by the Monnet Group.

Note on retraction by FRG Ministry of Defense of Von Hassel's declaration concerning the possibility of Italy's veto right within MLF. Annex missing.

Note on declaration by FRG Defense Minister Von Hassel on Italy's position vis-à-vis MLF. Annexes missing.

The document outlines Italy's stance on the decision-making process for the Multilateral Force (MLF), emphasizing the need for a restricted group of countries based on financial contributions rather than nuclear capability, as proposed by the UK. Italy insists on its inclusion in this committee, given its strategic importance. Responses from other nations varied: the U.S. appeared unaware of the UK's proposal, the UK favored Germany over Italy, Germany signaled alignment with Italy, and Turkey and the Netherlands raised concerns about limiting decision-making to nuclear powers. The document suggests further analysis and careful consideration of the broader implications.

Note by gen. Aldo Rossi on the activities of MLF working group, Italy's participation to the mixed crew ship experiment, costs and budget.