Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
470866643
label
NSDM 202 (National Security Decision Memorandums Working Files)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
470866643
contentType
document
title
NSDM 202 (National Security Decision Memorandums Working Files)
citationUrl
collections
National Security Files (Nixon Administration)
Institutional Files
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
470866643
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
54d3092f755f43a5
ocrText
Memo for Pres
ustrd as botton
From: Ch USC Irwin
May 15, 1972
Prosed Copy July 12, 1972
S
#4137
US Arctic Policy Review and Recoms
On Dec 22, 1971 you estab IAPC to oversee implementation of US
Arctic policy and be respns ible for reviewing and coord US activities
and programsin Arctic with exception of purely domestic Arctic-related
matters internal to Alaska. You directed IAPG review US Arctic
programs and forward through USC recoms for:
1. Incrasing mutually beneficial intl coop in a) exploation,
b) scientific research, c) resource devel and d) exchange of sci and tech
datea.
2. Improving US capability to inhabit and operate in Arctic
3. Understanding Arctic environment
4. Devel framework for intl coop in Arctic
5. Devel coord plan for sci research in and on Arctic
6. Devel comprehensive transportation system capable of
meeting US requirementsa in Arctic.
Review and recoms you requested completed. Report of IAPG, US
Arctic Programs Review and Recoms, is attached.
Report makes following recoms:
1. That draft Northlands and Arctic Cooperatia on Compact be accepted
as basis for devel of framework for intl coop in Arcric.
2. That State be authorized to investigate with prospective invitees
feasibility of calling converence to develop framework for intl coop
in Arctic
3. That US explore with Sovs a) future Arctic bilat coop and b) future
multilat cop including desirability of multilateral compace for A coop.
Exporation should take place as approp within context of existing agreem
ments with Sovs.
4. That should Sov response be favorable to desirability of multilt
compact for A coop, Sov participation in conference to develop such'
compact be sought.
Draft Compact designed to estab loose framework for enhancing coop
a,ong A and other interested states, particulary those with sci, environ-
mental and econ interests. Compact would provide umbrella under which
participating states could share experience and data in areas such as
environmental protection, sci research and transport technology.
As notedin greater detail in bæckground discussion attached, in past
USSR ha S shown little interest in A coop with other powers. Also the
case with Canadians for reasons related to C juridical claims in A.
In view of short time before your visit to USSR, I recom that Recom 3
be implemented in advance of Recom 2. Implementation of 2 at this time
will depend on response to 3.
In addition to recoms made, report notes that IAPG has taken follow ing
actions in furtherance of US A policy:
1. Asked State and Interagency Arctic Research Coord Cte to
study activities identified as being suitable for increased intl coop
and to recom specific proposals for increasing coop to IAPG by May 15.
IARCC also asked to identify and report A research activities suitable
for intl coop to IAPG on continuing basis.
2. Asked IARCC to continue devel of coord plan for sci research
including determination of research priorities and identification of
complementary or duplicatory projects. Plan to be forwarded by Sept 15.
3. Assigned to NSF respnsibility for coord exchange of A data
with other countries. NSD will coord closely with IARCC and Cte on Sci
and Tech Info (COSATI) of Federal Council of Sci and Tech. (FCST)
4. Appoved outline for A transporatation study proposed by DOT
and as first step directed DOT to undertake, with coop of other interested
agencies, stud of A transportation needs as initial phase in devel
comprehensive A transportation ystem. User/needs study to be CO completed
by Nov 30, 1972.
5. Encourage Interior to formulate suitable proposal for coop
internaiona program re resource and environmental inventorying and to
further develop concept of Alaska pilot project in area.
All mmbers of IAPG concur in above steps.
Findings and recoms of USC detailed in attached report. Background re
reviw and recoms on programs attached.
Recom:
That 1-4 be approved
Thqa 3 be implemented in advance of 2.
Attachments: 1. Report on IAPG
2. Background Discussion
3. NSF Reservations.
not included in folder
Memo for Pres
From: HAK
Jan 17, 1973
S
#5506
Arctic Program Revie and Recoms
DM 144 estab IAPG for policycoord and implementation and direct USC to
reviw and provide action programs for increasing intl coop, improving our
operational capability, improving our understanding of A environment, and
devel coord sci research programand adequate transportation system.
USC Ch Irwin has written you noting that studies are underway to devel
action programs to fulfill these directives. Final recoms will be
complete this year.
USC also directed to examine possibility of developng approp intl frame-
work for A coop. Irwin recoms, with concurrence of interested agencies,
that you approve draft Northlands and Arctic Coop Compact as basis on
which we should seek multinational framework. Compact would:
--provide loose, flex type of agreement for increasing coop in
areas of common concern (e.g. sci research, environmental protection,
resource devel)
--not infring on position of any Party as to its rights
under intl law re high seas and superjacent airspace
--not recognize, dispute or estab any territorial or juris
claims in A area.
USC recoms you authorize implementing steps toinclude
sounding out interested countries on desirability of donference to develop
such compact and particularly soundout Sovs first. Irwin notes, however,
that Sovs have shown little interest in A coop with otherp powers and
hatt Canadians approch subject cautiously because of their jurisdinctional
clai S in area.
Compact idea has some merit in principle because 1) dangers to Arctic
environment become more serious as technology opens area to reseurce
œvel and 2) trend toward unilat extensions of jurisdiction would cause
us serious strat mobility, econ, environmental and oceans policyproblems.
However, initial steps toward A coop withSovs are just beginning. Canada
and USSR have begun discussing A coop. US/USSR environmental protection
agreement provides for increasing coop in polar research. Also, in Nov,
Norway propsed multilaateral experts conference on A environmental
quality with idea of intergov meeting later. Initial US reaction XXXX
internally is favoable.
Given Sov sensitivitie and both Canadian and Sov concerns about preserving
jurisdictional prerogatives, US attempt now to institutionalize an um-
brella agreement appears premature and could be counterproductive as
our bilate programs are getting off the ground.
I believe therefore we should not propose multinational compact as
recm by IAPG. However, we should continue to develop and pursue actively
bilat and multilat coop programs in A which will provide basis for
future onsideration of any compact approach. Ehrlichman's office concurs.
Recom: APprove foregoing recoms as set forth in DM.
RN initialled Approve.
NSDM 202
January 22, 1973
HAK
C
Arctic Program Review and Recommendations
SecState
SecDef
SecInt
SecComm
SecTransp
Dir, NSF
Ch, CEQ
cc: SecHEW
DCI
Admin, EPA
Dir, OMB
Pres Science Advisor
Pres has reviewed report and recoms of Interagency Arctic Policy Group
forwarded by Ch USC July 21, 1972 pursuant to DM 144.
Noted progress by Group and reaffirmed his desire that US actively
develop and pursue programs for increasing bilateral and multilateral
cooperation in the Arctic, particularly in scientific research, resource
development and environmental proteetion.
Does not desire that US undertake disc ussions at this time with USSR,
Canada and other countries with Arctic interests with aim of promoting
establishment of multinational Northlands and Arctic Cooperation Compact
and convening of international conference to this end.
Memo for HAK
From: Michael A. Guhin through David D. Elliott
Jan 10, 1973
S/GDS
#5506
Arctic Program Review and Recoms
Memo updates my earlier one. DM 144 established Interagency Arctic
Policy Group (IAPG) for policy coord and impamenetaion and directed
USC to revew and provide action programs for:
--increasing intl coop int
--improving our operational capability in Arctic
--improving our understanding of Arctic environment
--developing coord Arctic scientific research program
--studying feasibility of comprehensive Arctic transport system
USC Ch Irwin has written Pres noting that studies underway to develp
action programs to fulfill these directives. Final program recoms will
be compel ted this year.
USC also directed to examine possibilty of developing approp intl frame-
work for Arctic coop. Irwin with concurrence of interested agencies
recoms that Pres approve draft Northlands and Arctic Cooperation
Compact as basis on which we should seek multinational framework.
This compact would provide loose, flex type of agreement for increasing
copp in areas of common concern (e.g. scientific research, environmental
protection, resource devel) while protecting our rights under intl law
re high seas and superjacent airspace and avoiding any territorial or
jurisdictional issues in area. (More details at C)
USC recoms Pres authorize implementing steps to include sounding out
interested countries on desrrability of conference to develop such a compa
compact and particulary sounding out Sovs first. Irwin notes, however,
that in past Sovs haveshown little interest in Arctic coop with other
poers and that Canadians approach subject cautiously because of their
jurisdinctional claims in area.
For reasons detailed in memo for Pres we believe we should not propose
a multinatioal compact now as recom by IAPG. (In brief, given Sov
strat, resource and security sensitivieis and both Cansadian and Sov
concerns about preserving jurisdictional prerogatives, US attempt now
to institutitonalize an umbrella agreement, however, harmless and worthy
on its face, appears premature and could be counter-productive as our
bilat progrms are just getting off the ground.) We should, however,
continue to develop and pursue actively bilateral and multilat coop pro-
grams in Arctic ehich will, in effect, lay groundowrk for any later
considerat of compact approach.
Proposed DM at A reflects foregoing recom. Memo for Pres would forward
USC report and recom he approve DM.
Ehriichman's Office (John Whitaker), Sonnefneldt (Clift for) and
Dick Kennedy concur
Recom: Forward memo for Bres, if he approves, sign DM