450 Foreign Relations, 1958-1960, Volume IX



stand that our internal policy requires this, which is very important to
us. It is a matter of honor.
    Secretary Herter: I would like to ask a question which the President
might not like to ask himself. There are two matters. The first is the
memorandum concerning the incident, and the second is the with-
drawal of the invitation to the President to go to Russia. Is it the intention
of Mr. Khrushchev to make both of these public after the meeting?
    Khrushchev: I intend to publish my full statement as made here.
Please understand this-how can I invite as a dear guest the leader of a
country which has committed an aggressive act against us. No visit
would be possible under present conditions. How could our people
welcome him? Even my small grandson would ask his grandpa: "How
could we welcome as an honored guest one who represents a country
that sends planes to overfly and which we shot down with a rocket?"
Both I and my guest would be in a false position. I don't want to put
myself or my guest in this equivocal position. Later on, when passions
have calmed down, the visit could be possible.
    Macmillan: What will be published and when?
    Khrushchev: All I said in my original statement today; our subse-
quent exchanges could be released by mutual agreement.
    Macmillan: I would ask Mr. Khrushchev to publish only the memo-
randum given to President de Gaulle and read to me. This would be in
our common interest and would also satisfy the problem of public opin-
ion in his own country. The President could then publish his statement.
Both positions would be made clear without adding acrimony or the
new controversial subject regarding the invitation. In such a case better
arrangements could be made for agreed publication at the end of the
Conference when the atmosphere was clearer. This would be an equita-
ble way to proceed if we want to get on with our work.
    Or perhaps I could suggest another solution. Since the second part
of the declaration contains an additional point, namely that of adjourn-
ment, perhaps it could be possible to publish it leaving out the reference
to the President's visit while leaving in the reference to adjournment.
The question of making public the statement regarding the invitation
could be decided later.
    De Gaulle: I took note of the two suggestions made by Mr. Macmil-
lan. However, even if only the first part is published I ask myself what
effect this would have, and whether the Conference would be able to go
on, because the first part contains the categorical statement that the So-
viet Union refuses to participate in the Summit Conference unless there
was a great change in the climate, and Mr. Khrushchev himself does not
believe that that change is probable. If all participants want the Confer-
ence to go on there should be no statement published at this stage. Now