Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T14:06:14.744Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NATO and the Environment: The Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2016

LINDA RISSO
LINDA RISSO*
Affiliation:
Department of History, School of Humanities, The University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AA; l.risso@reading.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Launched with considerable fanfare in 1969, the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (CCMS) was supposed to bring new life to NATO by both re-energising public support and engaging with a variety of themes, issues and partners well beyond the alliance's traditional scope. The first aim of this article is to go beyond the careful media operation that surrounded the launch of the CCMS and to examine the scepticism and resistance of some European partners, particularly the British. The second aim is to demonstrate that NATO started to think in terms of crisis management, disaster relief and environmental disasters well before 1989. The sheer military strength of the alliance and of its partners did remain central – and notably came back to the forefront in 1979 – but the alliance did start to see itself as a geopolitical player and to consider engagement beyond its strictly defined geographical area as early as 1969.

Type
Articles
Information
Contemporary European History , Volume 25 , Special Issue 3: European Integration , August 2016 , pp. 505 - 535
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For an effective summary of the changes in transatlantic relations in the 1970s, see Wenger, Andrea and Möckli, Daniel, ‘Power shifts and new security needs: NATO, European identity and the reorganisation of the West, 1967–1975’, in Hanhimäki, Jussi, Soutou, Georges-Henri and Germond, Basil, eds., The Routledge Handbook of Transatlantic Security (London: Routledge, 2010), 103–22Google Scholar. See also Wenger, Andreas, Nuenlist, Christian and Locher, Anna, eds., Transforming NATO in the Cold War: Challenges beyond Deterrence in the 1960s (London: Routledge, 2006)Google Scholar; Vincent, André, ‘The Technological Gaps: A Three-Dimensional Problem’, NATO Letter, 15, 10 (1967).Google Scholar

2 In his analysis of the history of the protest movements, Gerhard Wettig stresses the importance of Soviet intentions and geopolitical aims. See Wettig, Gerhard, ‘The last Soviet offensive in the Cold War: emergence and development of the campaign against NATO euromissiles, 1979–1983’, Cold War History, 9, 1 (2009), 79–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wettig, Gerhard, ‘Die Sowjetunion in der Auseinandersetzung über den Nato-Doppelbeschluss 1979–1983’, Vierteljahrshefte fur Zeitgeschichte, 57, 2 (2009), 217–59Google Scholar; Wettig, Gerhard, ‘Der Kreml und die Friedensbewegung Anfang der achtziger Jahre’, Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 60, 1 (2012), 143–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This view has been challenged by Holger Nehring and Benjamin Ziemann. See Nehring, Holger and Ziemann, Benjamin, ‘Do all paths lead to Moscow? The NATO Dual-track Decision and the Peace Movement – A Critique’, Cold War History, 12, 1 (2012), 1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Wittner, Lawrence S., Towards Nuclear Abolition: A History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement, 1971 to the Present (Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 2003)Google Scholar; Nehring, Holger, Politics of Security: British and West German Protest Movements and the Early Cold War, 1945–1970 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Meyer, Jan-Henrik and Poncharal, Bruno, ‘L'Européanisation de la Politique Environnementale Dans les Années 1970’, Vingtième Siècle, 113, 1 (2012), 117–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In the mid-1970s the peace movement expanded to include protests against civilian use of nuclear energy. These protests of course intensified in the aftermath of the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl in April 1986 and led to the first independent peace and ecological movement in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) and in other Eastern European states. Brüggemeier, Franz-Josef, Tschernobyl. 26 April 1986: Die ökologische Herausforderung (Munich: Dtv, 1998).Google Scholar

3 Flynn, Gregory, ‘Public Opinion and Atlantic Defence’, NATO Review, 31, 5 (1983).Google Scholar

4 Article 2 is often refered to as the ‘Canadian article’ as it was sponsored by the Canadian government during the treaty negotiations. Milloy, John C., The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 1948–1957: Community or Alliance? (Montreal: McGill Queen's University Press, 2006).Google Scholar

5 During the Cold War NATO science was divided into pure science, defence science and military science. Not surprisingly, military science was the first to be established (1951). It included activities under various NATO military authorities such as the Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, the SACLANT Anti-Submarine Warfare Research Centre in La Spezia and the SHAPE Technical Centre.

6 NATO and Science: Facts about the Activities of the Science Committee of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, 1958–1967 (Paris: NATO Scientific Affairs Division, 1967), 2.

7 Final Communiqué, Points 25–29, 16–19 Dec. 1957, available at www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17551.htm (last visited 1 Oct. 2015). In addition to NATO's own official publication, the most useful academic contributions to the study of the history of NATO science are Beer, Francis A., Integration and Disintegration in NATO: Processes of Alliance Cohesion and Prospects for Atlantic Community (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1969)Google Scholar; Krige, John, American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008)Google Scholar; Krige, John, ‘NATO and the Strengthening of Western Science in the Post-Sputnik Era’, Minerva, 38, 1 (2000), 81–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fenstad, Jen Erik, ‘NATO and Science’, European Review, 17, 3–4 (2009), 487–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Train, Russell E., ‘A New Approach to International Environmental Cooperation: The NATO Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society’, Kansas Law Review, 22, 2 (1974), 167–91Google Scholar. I have retraced the history of the Science Committee and of the CCMS in chapter 7: ‘Engaging with Science, Academia and the Leaders of Tomorrow’, in Risso, Linda, Propaganda and Intelligence in the Cold War: The NATO Information Service (London: Routledge, 2014)Google Scholar. Finally, see Macekura, Stephen, ‘The Limits of the Global Community: The Nixon Administration and Global Environmental Politics’, Cold War History, 11, 4 (2011), 489–518Google Scholar. The documents of the Science Committee are available in the NATO Archives, series AC/137. By 1966 the members of staff of the Science Committee numbered ten persons, two thirds of whom were concerned with pure science.

8 NATO and Science: An Account of the Activities of the NATO Science Committee, 1958–1972 (Brussels: NATO Scientific Affairs Division, 1973).

9 Krige, American Hegemony. Between 1959 and 1966, NATO's pure science budget rose from $1.15 million to $4.2 million. However, in the years between 1962 and 1966 the budget remained in the area of $4 million. See ‘Science Committee. The NATO Fellowship Programme. Report on the Programme for 1964’, 15 Feb. 1966, AC/137-D/271, NATO Archives (henceforward NA).

10 See more details about American frustration in Beer, Integration, 217–9.

11 General Norstad in particular was keen to promote collaboration in science purely as a means of maintaining a convincing deterrent. Norstad, Gen. Lauris, ‘NATO's Military Future: A Stronger “Shield”, a Sharper “Sword”’, General Electric Defense Quarterly, 1, 1 (1958) as quoted in Beer, Integration, 223–4Google Scholar. The lack of progress pushed the Italian Foreign Minister, Amintore Fanfani, to express concern about the increasingly dangerous ‘technological gap’ between Europe and the United States. See Fanfani's speech at the Ministerial meeting of June 1966. His proposal was the result of an Italian Foreign Ministry study, which had been launched after his conversation with Secretary of State Dean Rusk in June 1966. At the time, the idea of a ‘Marshall Plan for Technology’ was first discussed, see Foreign Relations of the United States (henceforward FRUS), 1964–1968, vol. XIII, Document 205, available at http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-68v13/d205 (last visisted 1 Oct. 2015). The Council recognised the problem and appointed a Special Working Group on International Technological Co-operation (AC/262) to explore the possibility of expanding the NATO science programme with the specific aim of bringing Western Europe to the same level of investment in science as the United States. The Special Working Group worked under the chairmanship of Secretary General Manlio Brosio, who delegated day-to-day responsibility to André Vincent, a French member of the International Staff. Vincent, André, ‘The Technological Gap: A Three-Dimensional Problem’, NATO Letter, 15, 10 (1967)Google Scholar. Yet again, the discussions were hampered by internal disagreements about the level of spending and reluctance to share details about the most-cutting edge projects. The result was, once again, a compromise that was destined to disappoint all parties concerned. ‘Resolution on International Technological Co-operation’, available at www.nato.int/docu/comm/49-95/c670613b.htm (last visited 1 Oct. 2015).

12 For a list of institutions, see NA, AC/137-WP 37, 22 May 1967.

13 Krige, American Hegemony; Beer, Integration.

14 The birth of the environmental movement is usually dated back to the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring in 1962. For helpful introductions to environmental history, see MacNeill, John R. and Unger, Corinna R., eds., Environmental Histories of the Cold War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mac Neill, John R. and Roe, Alan, eds., Global Environmental History: An Introductory Reader (London: Routledge, 2013).Google Scholar

15 Martin, Garret J., General de Gaulle's Cold War: Challenging American Hegemony, 1963–1968 (New York: Berghahn Books, 2013).Google Scholar

16 NATO's dual approach of maintaining credible collective defence based on the principles of MC 14/3, while at the same time pursuing a policy of détente through dialogue with the Soviet Union and the countries of the Warsaw Pact, was to provide the foundation of Alliance policy for the next twenty years. Bozo, Frédéric, ‘Détente Versus Alliance: France, the United States and the Politics of the Harmel Report’, Contemporary European History, 7, 3 (1998), 343–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Haftendorn, Helga, ‘The Adaptation of the NATO Alliance to a Period of Détente: The 1967 Harmel Report’, in Loth, Wilfried, ed., Crises and Compromises: The European Project 1963–1969, (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag, 2001), 285–322Google Scholar. Haftendorn, Helga, NATO and the Nuclear Revolution: A Crisis of Credibility, 1966–1967 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Address by President Nixon to the North Atlantic Council, Washington, 10 Apr. 1969, Foreign Relations, 1969–1976, Volume I, Foundations of Foreign Policy, available at 2001--2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/i/20701.htm (last visisted 1 Oct. 2015). This suggestion was included in the Final Communiqué (Point 14), available at www.nato.int/docu/comm/49-95/c690410a.htm (last visited 1 Oct. 2015).

18 Ward, Paul Von, Kendall, Glen R. and Bresee, Jens C., ‘Ten years of CCMS. The Record and the Future - Part 1’, NATO Review, 27, 6 (1979).Google Scholar

19 Macekura, ‘The Limits’; Flippen, J. Brooks, ‘Richard Nixon, Russell Train, and the Birth of Modern American Environmental Policy’, Environmetal History, 32 (2008), 1613–38Google Scholar; Hamblin, Jacob Darwin, ‘Environmentalism for the Atlantic Alliance: NATO's Experiment in the “Challenges of Modern Society”’, Environmental History, 15, 1 (2010), 54–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Summary Record of a Meeting of the Council held on Wednesday, 15 Oct. 1969 at 10:15am, 28 Oct. 1969, NA, CR(69)46. For the consultation about the terms of reference and focus of the new committee, see ‘Environmental Problems’, report by the Secretary General, 8 Jul 1969, NA, PO/69/338; Preparatory Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, 6 Oct. 1969, NA, CM(69)43; Von Ward et al., ‘Ten years of CCMS – Part 1’. Initially, the Federal Republic of Germany was sceptical and saw the initiative as an attempt by the United States to regain international terrain after the lost Vietnam War: see Hünemörder, Kai F., Die Frühgeschichte der globalen Umweltkrise und die Formierung der deutschen Umweltpolitik, 1950–1973, (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2004).Google Scholar

21 Risso, Propaganda, ch. 7.

22 ‘Environmental Problems’, report by the Secretary General, 8 July 1969, NA, PO/69/338. For these reasons, the launch of the CCMS was enthusiastically welcomed by the Atlantic Treaty Association and the North Atlantic Assembly as they saw it as a means to bring the alliance closer to the citizens and their daily concerns, ‘Atlantic Treaty Association: Sixteenth General Assembly. Final Resolution’, NATO Letter, 18, 11–12 (1970).

23 The first pilot studies were road safety, disaster relief, air pollution, open water pollution, inland water pollution, transmission of scientific knowledge and problems of individual and group motivation in modern industrial society. Given its role in launching CCMS, it is not surprising that the United States volunteered to act as pilot country of three out of the seven first studies carried out by CCMS. ‘CCMS recommends seven pilot studies at first meeting’, NATO Letter, 18, 1 (1970).

24 Preparatory Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, 6 Oct. 1969, NA, CM(69)43; ‘Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society’, NATO Letter, 18, 1 (1970).

25 ‘Environmental problems’, report by the Secretary General, 8 July 1969, NA, PO/69/338.

26 NATO answered this point by maintaining that it was crucial to have several independent studies showing the need for urgent action and make recommendations more forceful, see Preparatory Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, 6 Oct. 1969, NA, CM(69)43.

27 Risso, Propaganda, ch. 7.

28 ‘Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society and NATO's third dimension’, NATO Letter, 18, 2 (1970).

29 More details about this film are provided in Risso, Propaganda, 192–3. A copy of the film can be found in the media archives of the Imperial War Museum in London.

30 Doc. 44, Memorandum from the President's Assistant for Urban Affairs (Moynihan) to President Nixon, Washington, 1 July 1970, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 175–8.

31 ‘Conference of National Information Officials. Report by the Chairman’, 3 June 1971, NA, CM(71)44.

32 Nixon was genuinely committed to environmental protection. At the beginning of his presidency, he established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) at the White House and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to formulate and oversee implementation of national environmental policy, as well as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) within the Department of Commerce to complement EPA's efforts. See Macekura, ‘The Limits’.

33 Doc. 1, Intelligence Memorandum prepared in the Central Intelligence Agency, OCI No. 0549/69 Washington, 21 Jan. 1969, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 1.

34 Doc. 4, Telegram From the Mission to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to the Department of State, Brussels, 23 Jan. 1969, 2225Z, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 19–21.

35 Macekura, ‘The Limits’.

36 Hamblin, ‘Environmentalism’. See also several documents published in FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO.

37 Doc. 16, Memorandum from the Under Secretary of State (Richardson) to President Nixon, Washington, 6 May 1969, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 60–2.

38 Arthur F. Burns (Chairman on the Council of Economic Advisers and future Chairman of the Federal reserve) and James E. Allen (US Commissioner of Education) were also assigned to the proejct. See Doc. 16, Memorandum From the Under Secretary of State (Richardson) to President Nixon. Washington, 6 May 1969, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 60–2.

39 Train, Russell E., Politics, Pollution and Pandas: An environmental memoir (Washington: Island Press, 2003), 151.Google Scholar

40 See for example: To all national delegations from ASG for Scientific Affairs, 18 July 1969, NA, ASG.SA(69)201.

41 Doc. 19, Memorandum from the President's Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger) to President Nixon, Washington, 2 June 1969, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 65–6.

42 Note to Bendall and Williams from J. P. Waterfield, 23 June 1969, folio 6, National Archives, Kew, London (henceforward UKNA), CAB 168/278.

43 Moynihan quoted in ‘Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society’, NATO Letter, Jan. (1970), 8.

44 Train, ‘A New Approach’; ‘Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society’, NATO Letter, Jan. (1970), 8.

45 For the failed attempt to laise with the OECD, see the last two pages of Progress Report by the Chairman of the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, 15 May 1970, NA, CM(70)19(Final); Letter to C. J. Audland from J. C. A. Roper, 26 Nov. 1969, folio 78, UKNA, CAB 168/279.

46 See, for example, ASG for Scientific Affairs and Acting Chairman of the CCMS, quoted in ‘Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society’, NATO Letter, Jan. (1970), 8.

47 OECD: Ad Hoc Preparatory Committee on the Environment, Telegram from FCO to UKDEL NATO, tel. no. 28, 24 Apr. 1970, folio 204, UKNA, CAB 168/281.

48 Copy of Letter to Randers from US Permanent Representative, 23 July 1969, folio 14B, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

49 Doc. 23, Telegram from the Under Secretary of State (Richardson) to the Department of State, London, 6 Nov. 1969, 1901Z, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 71–3.

50 Letter to Cottrell from J. N. Elam, 24 June 1969, with encl. folio 7, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

51 Letter to R. Arculus from R. Wakefield, Aug. 1970, folio 289, UKNA, CAB 168/283.

52 Letter to R. Arculus from J. E. Beddoe, 17 Aug. 1970, folio 290, UKNA, CAB 168/283.

53 Letter to R. Arculus from R. Wakefield, Aug. 1970, folio 289, UKNA, CAB 168/283.

54 Brief for Sir Solly Zuckerman from Alan Smith, 2 Oct. 1970, folio 304, UKNA, CAM 168/284.

55 Letter to Cottrell from J. N. Elam, 24 June 1969, with encl. folio 7, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

56 Letter to R. Q. Braithwaite from E. C. Appleyard, 2 Oct. 1969, folio 48, UKNA, CAB 168/279.

57 Telegram to UKDEL NATO from FCO, tel. no. 6 Saving, 11 July 1969, folio 13A, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

58 Letter to Cottrell from J. D. Bletchly, 16 Feb. 1970, folio 13, UKNA, CAB 168/280.

59 Telegram to UKDEL NATO from FCO, tel. no. 6 Saving, 11 July 1969, folio 13A, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

60 Letter to C. J. Audland from E. C. Appleyard, 1 Oct. 1969, folio 46, UKNA, CAB 168/279.

61 Telegram to UKDEL NATO from FCO, tel. no. 6 Saving, 11 July 1969, folio 13A, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

62 Note to Bendall and Williams from J. P. Waterfield, 23 June 1969, folio 6, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

63 Minute to Williams from J. P. Waterfield, 25 June 1969, folio 8, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

64 Telegram to FCO (Cottrell) from Burrows, tel. no. 374, 20 June 1969, enclosed to folio 8, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

65 Minute to Cottrell from Alan Smith, 19 Feb. 1970, folio 119, UKNA, CAB 168/280. See also Brosio's official report to the NAC: ‘Environmental Problems’, Report by the Secretary General, 8 July 1969, NA, PO/69/338.

66 Telegram to UKDEL NATO from FCO, tel. no. 6 Saving, 11 July 1969, folio 13A, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

67 The Council approved Brosio's report on 15 July. Two days later Randers informed all national delegations that the Preparatory Committee was to report back to the Council on 15 October. He suggested that the Committee met on 8–9 September and already asked for comments on points 6–8 of Brosio's report by 10 August. See To all national delegations from ASG for Scientific Affairs, 17 July 1969, NA, ASG.SA(69)201. The terms of reference and procedure of the Preparatory Committee were circulate in late August. See Preparatory Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, Note by the Chairman, 26 Aug. 1969, NA, AC/269-D/1.

68 Telegram to UKDEL NATO from FCO, 29 Aug. 1969, tel. no. 7 Saving, folio 26, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

69 Letter to E. C. Appleyard from R. Q. Braithwaite, 9 Oct. 1969, folio 52, UKNA, CAB 168/279.

70 Telegram to UKDEL NATO from FCO, 4 Sept. 1969, tel. no. 299, folio 27, UKNA, CAB 168/278.

71 NATO archival documents relating to the work of the Preparatory Committee are gathered in AC/269 (1969). The papers of the CCMS can be found in AC/274 (1969–2006).

72 Letter to C. J. Audland from Dr Cottrell, 25 Nov. 1969, folio 77, UKNA, CAB 168/279; Minute to Sir Solly from Dr Atkinson, 19 Feb. 1970, folio 118A, and Minute to Dr Cottrell from Dr Atkinson, 24 Feb, 1970, folio 119A, both in UKNA, CAB 168/280.

73 The key person was Frank Wheeler. See Letter to Cottrell from C. J. Audland, 19 Nov. 1969, folio 74, UKNA, CAB 168/279.

74 Holdgate, M. W., ed., The Seabird Wreck of 1969 in the Irish Sea: a Report by the Natural Environment Research Council (London: NERC, 1970)Google Scholar. See also Tinker, Jon, ‘1969 Seabird Wreck: PCBs probably guilty’, New Scientist and Science Journal, 8 Apr. 1971, 69.Google Scholar

75 Preparatory Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, Note by the Chairman, 6 Oct. 1969, NA, CM(69)43; Preparatory Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, Draft report to the Council, Note by the Chairman, 15 Sept. 1969, NA, AC/269-D/2. For the proceedings of the Preparatory Committee and list of participants, see Preparatory Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, Summary record of a meeting held at the NATO Headquarters, Brussels, 39, on 8–10 September 1969, 10 Oct. 1969. NA, AC/269-R/1.

76 Progress Report by the Chairman of the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, 15 May 1970, NA, CM(70)19(Final).

77 Decisions of the Council on the recommendations by the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society: Document CM(70)14, 14 May 70, NA, PO/70/235 (Revise). For an example of the ad-hoc approach to the admission of observers, see Observers to the next meeting of the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society, 1 Apr. 1971, NA, PO/71/180.

78 Letter to J. Thomas from D. E. Richards, 10 Dec. 1969, folio 86, UKNA, CAB 168/279. Cottrell's address was reproduced in the NATO Letter 18, 2 (1970) along with the speeches of the other key speakers. Cottrell's intervention appears indeed much shorter, more vague and with more hints of scepticism than the others published in the same article.

79 Letter to Zuckerman from Cottrell, 11 Dec. 1969, folio 87, UKNA, CAB 168/279.

80 Ibid.

81 Minute to Zuckerman and Burke Trend from Cottrell on UK–US cooperation in international organisations (NATO CCMS, OECD, ECE), 21 Apr. 1970, folio 194, UKNA, CAB 168/281.

82 Letter to E. C. Appleyard from H. C. Rackham, 15 Dec. 1969, folio 88, UKNA, CAB 168/279.

83 Annex C: Environmental Problems, 7 Dec. 1970, folio 352, UKNA, CAB 168/284.

84 Letter to Sir Solly Zuckerman from Sir Denis Greenhill, 9 Oct. 1970, folio 314, UKNA, CAB 168/284. For a list of national delegates attending the meeting of the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society from 19 to 20 October 1970 and for a summary of the discussions and conclusions, see CCMS, Summary record of a meeting held at the NATO headquarters, on 19–20 October 1970, 11 Dec. 1970. UKNA, AC/274-R/5.

85 Personal minute to Dr Cottrell from J. N. Elam, ‘UK Pilot Study for the NATO Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (CCMS)’, 12 Mar. 1970, folio 139, UKNA, CAB 168/280. The pilot study on individual and group motivation was chaired by Dr N. A. B. Wilson, Navy psychologist in Department of Defence. Initially the British contribution was to be a joint effort betwen the Department of Employment and Productivity and the FCO. It was later agreed that the study would be run entirely by the DEP. See Letter to R. Arculus from Alan Smith enclosing a Note of Mtg held in AHC's Room on 24.2.80, 27 Feb. 1970, folio 122, UKNA, CAB 168/280.

86 Telegram to FCO from Washington, tel. no. 1011, 6 Apr. 1970, folio 175, UKNA, CAB 168/281.

87 Note of a meeting between the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning and Dr Moynihan, Principal Adviser to the President on Thursday, 16 April 1970, 17 Apr. 1970, folio 191, UKNA, CAB 168/281.

88 Telegram to FCO from UKDEL NATO, tel. no. 200, 15 Apr. 1970, folio 189, UKNA, CAB 168/281.

89 Letter to W. R. Cox from R. Arculus, 27 Apr. 1970, folio 206, UKNA, CAB 168/281.

90 Letter to A. H. Cottrell from D. J. Lyons, 31 Mar. 1970, folio 157, UKNA, CAB 168/281.

91 From Steward to UKDEL NATO, tel. no. 156, 1 May 1970, folio 241, UKNA, CAB 168/282. IMCO changed its name in 1982 to today's International Maritime Organization (IMO).

92 NATO CCMS Road Safety Study: Record of Conversation in FCO on 29 May 1970, 2 June 1970, folio 245, UKNA, CAB 168/282.

93 Annex C: Environmental Problems, 7 Dec. 1970, folio 352, UKNA, CAB 168/284.

94 Annex C: Environmental Problems, 7 Dec. 1970, folio 352, UKNA, CAB 168/284. About the British frustrations in handling Moynihan, an internal FCO document mentions that: ‘he is conscious of his Cabinet rank and he is a man of forceful temperament. He has tended to exaggerate what NATO can usefully do in the environmental field.’ Letter to C. Gilbraith from T. L. A. Daunt, 28 Sept. 1970, folio 301, UKNA, CAB, 168/284.

95 Methods of Work of the CCMS, from ASG for Scientific Affairs to Secretary General [no date], NA, ASG(71)094. The CCM working methods were subsequently reviewed to streamline the flow of information, which included the appointment of liaison officers, see Methods of Work of the CCMS, From Secretaty General to Permanent Representatives, 19 May 1971. NA, PO/71/240; CCMS procedures: Conclusions of PO/71/240 as discussed by Delegations on 18 June 1971, 22 June 1971, NA, PO/71/295.

96 Train later became Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (from Sept. 1973 to Jan. 1977). He was Founder Chairman Emeritus of World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

97 Letter to Zuckerman from Stephen H. Rogers, 13 Jan. 1971, folio 359, UKNA, CAB 168/285. It includes a copy of the press release.

98 Doc. 44, Memorandum From the President's Assistant for Urban Affairs (Moynihan) to President Nixon, Washington, 1 July 1970, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 175–8.

99 Doc. 44, Memorandum From the President's Assistant for Urban Affairs (Moynihan) to President Nixon, Washington, 1 July 1970, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 175–8.

100 Telegram to FCO from UKDEL NATO, tel. no. 11 Saving, 11 Nov. 1971, folio 463A, UKNA, CAB 168/288.

101 Principal Officials at the NATO International Staff, available at www.nato.int/cv/is/home2.htm#ASG-SA (last visisted 1 Feb. 2015).

102 CCMS: Fellowship programme for public policy and technology related to the environment, Note by the Chairman, 9 Apr. 1971, NA, AC/274-N/20. The scheme was partially financed by the NATO Civil Budget and by private and national sponsorships.

103 Sampas, J. G., ‘New US Administration Reaffirms Strong Support for CCMS During Plenary Session’, NATO Review, 25, 6 (1977).Google Scholar

104 The NATO Review dedicated its cover page and several articles to pollution in Venice. NATO Review, 27, 6 (1979).

105 To cite one example, a CCMS technical study on oil spills initiated in 1969 led to a NATO resolution calling for an international effort to prevent further degradation of the world's oceans, which fed into the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL).

106 Other organisations such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) also became important actors in the field and eclipsed the role of the CCMS.

107 Von, Wardet al., ‘Ten years of CCMS – Part 1’, 13.Google Scholar

108 For a full list of the projects carried out after 1987, see Science for Peace and Security Programme: List of reports of nationally-funded activities (NFA) published under the former committee on challenges of modern society (CCMS), available at http://www.nato.int/science/2012/LISPUB-NFA.pdf (last visited 1 Oct. 2015). More titles can be found on the website of the US Environmental Protection Agency.

109 For more information, see the SPS website at URL: www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/78209.htm (last visited 1 Feb. 2015).

110 Von, Ward et al., ‘Ten Years of CCMS – Part 1’, 16–7.

111 Ward, Paul Von, Kendall, Glen R. and Bresee, Jens C., ‘Ten Years of CCMS: The Record and the Future – Part 2’, NATO Review, 28, 1 (1980), 18.Google Scholar

112 Von, Ward et al., ‘Ten Years of CCMS – Part 2’, 18.

113 Memorandum from Director of Information to the Committee on Information and Cultural Relations, 24 Feb. 1971, NA, MEMO (71)3.

114 In the words of Harlan Cleveland, US Permanent Representative to NATO. See Doc. 4, Telegram From the Mission to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to the Department of State, Brussels, 23 Jan. 1969, 2225Z, FRUS, 1969–1976, vol. 41: Western Europe, NATO, 19–21.