In the late 50s and early 60s, in response to the UK and French nuclear programs, the US government apparently seriously floated a plan to build a joint NATO nuclear force, consisting of 25 ships carrying 8 Polaris ballistic missiles each. It would have been called the Multilateral Force (MLF).
The MLF ships would have been merchant freighters with missile launchers concealed in the holds. They would be paid for primarily by the US and Germany (~40% each), with contributions also coming from Italy (~10% to ~20%) and possibly the UK (~10%), with token contributions from Belgium, Holland, Turkey, and Greece. They would be manned by multinational crews, with at least three nations represented on each vessel.
The missiles would be under a dual-key system where the four main contributors, the US, Germany, Italy, and the UK (if they participated), would all have to agree before the missiles could be fired. The program got to the point of a trial multinational crew on a USN destroyer, which apparently worked quite well, and modifying an Italian cruiser to carry four Polaris missiles. (Not clear on how that fitted in with the missile carriers disguised as merchantships thing).
The aim of the program was to ameliorate the desire of the NATO states, particularly Germany, for their own atomic weapons programs. The US also appeared to hope that the UK and possibly even France might be induced to give up their weapons in favor of this scheme. There also seems to have been a hope that it would bind the participant nations' militaries more closely together on a sociological level, by giving Germany, Italy, etc. practice in planning and control of nuclear weapons.
Sources: Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, wikipedia.
Thirty minutes of googling haven't revealed the specific circumstances of the proposal's demise, although it doesn't seem hard to guess. The main motivation for France's independent deterrent, and the potential deterrent of other European states, was the legitimate fear that the US would be unwilling to risk losing New York City to save Paris; if the US has to sign off on using the missiles, I'm not clear on how this project would have changed the situation. In particular, a segment of the American defense establishment seemed to regard MLF as the best way to head off a largely non-existent German desire for their own nuclear weapons. The Europeans don't seem to have ever been that keen on it, especially the Germans, who were supposed to pony up almost half the manpower and money.
The Europeans evidently also preferred to keep the missiles on submarines rather than surface ships, which the US disliked because then the US would have to build them and train the crews, reducing the multilateralness of the whole concept.
Still, it's an interesting idea, and a search didn't find any mention of it in the board archives. So, what do you think? Could the MLF have been fielded? And what would the consequences be if it had been?
The MLF ships would have been merchant freighters with missile launchers concealed in the holds. They would be paid for primarily by the US and Germany (~40% each), with contributions also coming from Italy (~10% to ~20%) and possibly the UK (~10%), with token contributions from Belgium, Holland, Turkey, and Greece. They would be manned by multinational crews, with at least three nations represented on each vessel.
The missiles would be under a dual-key system where the four main contributors, the US, Germany, Italy, and the UK (if they participated), would all have to agree before the missiles could be fired. The program got to the point of a trial multinational crew on a USN destroyer, which apparently worked quite well, and modifying an Italian cruiser to carry four Polaris missiles. (Not clear on how that fitted in with the missile carriers disguised as merchantships thing).
The aim of the program was to ameliorate the desire of the NATO states, particularly Germany, for their own atomic weapons programs. The US also appeared to hope that the UK and possibly even France might be induced to give up their weapons in favor of this scheme. There also seems to have been a hope that it would bind the participant nations' militaries more closely together on a sociological level, by giving Germany, Italy, etc. practice in planning and control of nuclear weapons.
Sources: Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, wikipedia.
Thirty minutes of googling haven't revealed the specific circumstances of the proposal's demise, although it doesn't seem hard to guess. The main motivation for France's independent deterrent, and the potential deterrent of other European states, was the legitimate fear that the US would be unwilling to risk losing New York City to save Paris; if the US has to sign off on using the missiles, I'm not clear on how this project would have changed the situation. In particular, a segment of the American defense establishment seemed to regard MLF as the best way to head off a largely non-existent German desire for their own nuclear weapons. The Europeans don't seem to have ever been that keen on it, especially the Germans, who were supposed to pony up almost half the manpower and money.
The Europeans evidently also preferred to keep the missiles on submarines rather than surface ships, which the US disliked because then the US would have to build them and train the crews, reducing the multilateralness of the whole concept.
Still, it's an interesting idea, and a search didn't find any mention of it in the board archives. So, what do you think? Could the MLF have been fielded? And what would the consequences be if it had been?