Abstract
If the period between 1958 and 1961 was one of political success for the British government’s nuclear defence policy, with growing American links and the domestic political opposition in disarray, the succeeding three years were not so happy. The Macmillan government was weakened by economic difficulties and political scandal, and in October 1963 the Prime Minister was forced to resign for health reasons. The impressive series of Anglo-American defence agreements reached under Eisenhower, including the atomic bilateral, remained in force. The new Kennedy administration, however, resolved officially and specifically to discourage Britain’s nuclear ambitions. Although Macmillan came to enjoy a cordial and even friendly relationship with Kennedy, his major diplomatic achievements vis-à-vis the US — the Polaris deal of December 1962 and the successful pursuit of a partial nuclear test-ban in 1963 — came at a political price, and necessarily involved the defeat of powerful bureaucratic interests in Washington. Polaris, as we shall see, was seen in some quarters as a very visible blow to Britain’s independence, and the deal infuriated the State Department. Acute pressure to agree to join the NATO MLF was to follow. On the way to the partial test-ban, Britain was made to look. On the way to the partial test-ban, Britain was made to look slightly ridiculous at ministerial meetings in Moscow, and the deal was bad news to the Pentagon and the nuclear-weapons laboratories in the US.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Writing in April 1963, and quoted in Adrian Smith, ‘Command and control in postwar Britain’, Twentieth Century British History 2/3 (1991), p. 306.
Kennedy to Macmillan 3 Aug 1961 in US Dept of State, Foreign relations of the United States 1961–3, vol. VII: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/kennedyjf/vii/50950.htm (accessed Aug 2007).
For one of the best analyses of the Berlin problem, see Marc Trachtenberg, History and strategy (Princeton UP 1991), ch. 5.
Sean M Maloney, ‘Berlin contingency planning: prelude to flexible response, 1958–63’, Journal of Strategic Studies 25/1 (Mar 2002), pp. 99–134.
David A Rosenberg, ‘Constraining overkill: contending approaches to nuclear strategy, 1955–65’, Colloquium on Contemporary History Seminar 9 (1994), US Naval Historical Center: http://www.history.navy.mil/colloquia/cch9b.html (accessed Aug 2007).
Beatrice Heuser, Nuclear mentalities: strategies and beliefs in Britain, France and the FRG (Macmillan 1998).
Gen Curtis E LeMay USAF with MGen Dale O Smith USAF, America is in danger (New York, Funk and Wagnalls 1968), p. 163; Ball, Politics and force levels, p. 185.
William W Kaufmann, The McNamara strategy (New York, Harper and Row 1964), p. 53.
Robert Frank Futrell, Ideas, concepts, doctrine: basic thinking in the United States Air Force 1961–84 (Maxwell AFB, Air University Press 1989), p. 62.
Gary D Rawnsley, ‘How special is special? The Anglo-American alliance during the Cuban missile crisis’, Contemporary Record 9/3 (Winter 1995), pp. 586–601;
Peter G Boyle, ‘The British government’s view of the Cuban missile crisis’, Contemporary Record 10/3 (Autumn 1996), pp. 22–38;
Len Scott, Macmillan, Kennedy and the Cuban missile crisis: political, military and intelligence aspects (Macmillan 1999); Twigge and Scott, ‘The other other missiles of October: the Thor IRBMs and the Cuban missile crisis’, Electronic Journal of International History (Jun 2000): http://www.history.ac.uk/ejournal/art3.html (accessed Aug 2007); Ashton, Kennedy, Macmillan and the cold war, ch. 4.
Robin Woolven, ‘UK involvement in the Cuban missile crisis’, presentation to the British Rocketry Oral History Project conference at Charterhouse, March 2008.
Ernest May and Philip Zelikow, The Kennedy tapes: inside the White House during the Cuban missile crisis (Harvard UP 1997), p. 692; Ashton, Kennedy, Macmillan and the cold war, p. 77.
Andrew Priest, ‘In common cause: the NATO multilateral force and the mixed-manning demonstration on the USS Claude V. Ricketts, 1964–1965’, Journal of Military History 69/3 (Jul 2005), pp. 759–88.
Alan Pritchard, ‘Negotiating the sales agreement’ in John Moore, ed., The impact of Polaris, p. 31;
Peter Nailor, The Nassau connection: the organisation and management of the British Polaris project (HMSO 1988), p. 20.
Labour Party, The New Britain: http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1964/1964-labour-manifesto.shtml (accessed Aug 2007).
Conservative Party, Prosperity with a purpose: http://www.conservative-party.net/manifestos/1964/1964-conservative-manifesto.shtml (accessed Aug 2007).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2010 Richard Moore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Moore, R. (2010). Policy-making 1961–64. In: Nuclear Illusion, Nuclear Reality. Nuclear Weapons and International Security since 1945. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230251403_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230251403_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-31163-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-25140-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)