CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE

Document Type: 
Collection: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
CIA-RDP68B00432R000500020016-2
Release Decision: 
RIFPUB
Original Classification: 
K
Document Page Count: 
16
Document Creation Date: 
December 15, 2016
Document Release Date: 
August 4, 2000
Sequence Number: 
16
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
May 3, 1966
Content Type: 
OPEN
File: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon CIA-RDP68B00432R000500020016-2.pdf2.87 MB
Body: 
Approved Fo elease_2q03/03/25 : CIA-RDP6O,00 311005900_?00_16-2 _ 1 2/27-44,2, 9110 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE May 3, 1966 Second, to outline a progressive and rea- sonable method of financing the programs of SBA and other Government agencies. There i 3 an important relationship between these two. They are part of this Adminis- tration's )ffort to make sure that our Govern- ment ass stance programs are wisely planned and organized, that they are supported by private Efforts wherever possible, and that they are managed by the most competent men available for the public service. The bill I will sign today allows SBA to set up two separate revolving funds?one for business loans, and one for disaster loans. ' In this way the disruptions in the business loan prc gram, which have sometimes oc- curred when disasters have struck various commun ties, can be avoided. The bill also increases by $125 million the amount of loans SBA may have on its books at any one time. And we expect SBA to use this authority to serve more firms than ever before. These are necessary changes, if the Agency Is to carry out the small business program I have proposed for the coming fiscal year. Our budget for fiscal year 1967 proposes that SW., make available about $725 million in loans, guarantees, and other commitments to smal. business. That is the largest amount )4 financing SBA has undertaken in Its entire history. It is more than four times what tin Agency 'accomplished in 1060. This ie an impressive program?as it must be, if it is to keep pace with the growth of small business during the past 4 years. There are about 300,000 more small busi- ness firms operating in America today than there were 4 years ago. There 'mere 20 percent fewer failures among all businesses last year, than there were in 1961. You know only too well that the great part of those failures were among small businesses. Profits after taxes in small manufacturing corporations were nearly three times greater in 1965 tian they were in 1961. ? Small business hes taken a much greater share of military prime contract awards. In 1961 small firms obtained $3.6 billion of those awards. In 1965 the figure was $1.0 billion?an increase of 36 percent in 4 years. So we are planning and working for a growth industry?for almost 5 million busi- nesses, irons the corner store to the small manufacturer?for those millions of men and women who by their initiative and deter- mination and hope keep the wheels moving in our economy. ' This bill is essential for their growth and We want to authorize the SBA to sell par- ticipations in its loan portfolio?to sell shares in this great $1.5 million pool of out- standing loans. Those shares would be guar- anteed by the SBA, and sold to private in- vestors large and small. The Federal Na- tional Mortgage Association, "Fannie Mae," will act as trustee. Once the certificates are sold, the proceeds will come back to SBA. They will be avail- able for lending to other dynamic small firms that are hungry for capital to produce and expand. The legislation we have asked for to achieve this has passed the Senate. It is under active consideration in the House. It is as necessary for small business as it is sound for the Government. SBA is not the only Federal agency in. need of more effective financing authority. If selling certificates of participation makes sense for SBA, it makes sense as well in our other programs. That is why I have rec- ommended that the Congress authorize the same sound fiscal procedures for agencies throughout the Government. This policy is not original with this ad- ministration. In 1954, in 1955, in 1956, and again in 1958, President Eisenhower affirmed his belief that private capital should be gradually substitute for the Government's Investment in housing mortgages. In 1954, for example, President Eisenhower said: "The policy of this administration is to sell the mortgages now held (by the Federal National Mortgage Association) as rapidly as tho mortgage market permits." In 1955, again President Eisenhower made clear his position: "Private capital will be gradually substituted for the Government investment until the Government funds are fully repaid and the private owners take over responsibility for the program." President Eisenhower appointed a Com- mission on Money and Credit, and in 1961 the Commission's report called once again for the maximum substitution of private for Federal credit. In 1962 President Kennedy's Committee on Federal Credit Programs reported that "un- less the urgency of other goals makes pri- vate participation infeasible, the methods used should facilitate private financing, and thus encourage longrun achievement of program objectives with a minimum of Gov- ernment aid." And RS recently as 1963 the Republican members of the House Ways and Means Com- mittee, led by Congressmen BYRNES, Cuases, UM', BETTS, SCIINEEBELI, and COLLIER, argued development. But it is only half the answer that "the administration also can reduee its to small business needs. - borrowing requirements by additional sales It gives SBA the authority to carry out of marketable Government assets." our program for the coming year. But it does not give it any money. We proposed to the Congress last year a new wa:r of providing the funds necessary for our small business programs. Today SBA has only a limited amount of money f or its lending operations. That does not mean the Agency is without assets. Far from it. It has in its revolving fund?in its loan por bfolio?loan paper worth almost $11/2 billion, These tremendous assests, owed to the SBAThy those who have borrowed from It in past' yetrs, represent the taxpayer's money. Their representatives in Congress have ap- propriated it to the SBA over the years, to be ?invested in small business concerns. But there is no reason for SBA to hold so large at, inventory. It can and should be able to cell its loans to private investors. In that wa7, it should be able to generate new funds for it expanded lending programs, ? SBA las long had the authority' to sell its seasoned loans, as well as to make them. It has used that authority over the years?to provide new capital for assisting more small That is what we are trying to do through the general legislation- we have offered to Congress. We are trying to further the sub- stitution of private for public credit?wher- ever and whenever we can in our free enter- prise system. We want to extend the prin- ciple of private participation to SBA, and to Its sister agencies throughout the Govern- ment. ? ? Now it is my great pleasure to sign. my name to the Small Business Act Amendments of 1966. NEW YORK TIMES RESPONSIBLY REPORTS ON THE CIA Mr. TYDINGS. Mr. President, last week the New York Times published a series of five very illuminating articles concerning the Central Intelligence Agency. The Times attached such significance to this series that it assigned several of Its top writers, including Tom Wicker, As one would expect from this team, the Times series on the CIA was top- notch. It was illuminating, incisive, and responsible. The Times writers, avoiding the superficially sensational, raised a number of provocative questions about the CIA and provided substantial factual background to illuminate the search for the answers. Because I deem these articles of con- siderable value to the current congres- sional discussion of the proper degree of congressional review of CIA activities, I ask unanimous consent that they be printed. There being no objection, the articles were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: [From the New York Times, Apr, 25, 19661 CIA: MAXER OP PoLicsi, OR TOOL ?--SURVEY FINDS WIDELY FEARED AGENCY Is TIGHTLY CONTROLLED (Norz.?The Central Intelligence Agency, which does not often appear in the news, made headlines on two counts in. recent days. The Agency was found to have inter- ceded in the slander trial of one of its agents in an effort to obtain his exoneration with- out explanation except that he had done its bidding in the interest of national security. And it was reported to have planted at least five agents among Michigan State University scholars engaged in a foreign aid project some years ago in Vietnam. Although the specific work of these agents and the cir- cumstances of their employment are in dis- pute, reports of their activities have raised ninny questions about the purposes and methods of the CIA, and about its relation- ship to other parts of the Government and nongovernmental institutions. Even larger questions about control of the CIA within the framework of a . free government and about its role in foreign affairs are period- ically brought up in Congress and among other governments. To provide background for these questions, and to determine what issues of public policy are posed by the Agency's work. The New York Times has spent several months looking into its af- fairs. This series is the result. (Following is the first of five articles on the Central Intelligence Agency. The arti- cles are by a team of New York Times cor- respondents consisting of Tom Wicker, John W. Finney, Max Frankel, E. W. Kenworthy, and other Times staff members.) WesniNcrorr.?One day in 1960 an agent of the Central Intelligence Agency caught a plane' in Tokyo, flew to Singapore and checked into a hotel room in time to receive a visitor. The agent plugged a lie detector into an overloaded electrical circuit and blew out the lights in the building. In the investigation that followed, the agent and a CIA colleague were arrested and jailed as American spies. The result was an international incident that infuriated London, not once but twice. It embarrassed an American Ambassador. It led an American Secretary of State to write a rare letter of apology to a foreign chief of state. Five years later that foreign leader was handed an opportunity to denounce the perfidy of all Americans and of the CIA in particular, thus increasing the apprehen- sion of his oriental neighbors about the Agency and enhancing his own political position: Ultimately, the incident led the U.S. Gov- ernment to tell a 'lie in public and then to admit the lie even snore publicly. PERSISTENT QUESTIONS businesg as. Max Frankel, Bud Kenworthy, and John and we areAfircisfdomttopsewl-M4' ?yes : efAr-1415 Of661121132R The lie was no sooner disclosed than a practical IS fileloi aktittapilicyiohn of htalPepeTe'cti `1,11 May 3, 1966 Approved For Release 2003/03/25: CIA-RDP681300432R000500020016-2 CONGRESSIOiL RECORD ? SENATE in Singapore a years earlier began to repeat questions that have dogged the Agency and the U.S. Govei nment for years. Was this secret body, which was known to have overthrown governments and in- stalled others, raised armies, staged an in- vasion of Cuba, spied and counterspied, es- tablished airlines, radio stations and schools and suppor te 1 books, magazines and busi- nesses, running out of the control of its sup- posed politicaL master? Was it in fact damaging, while it sought to advance, t so national interest? Could it spend huge sums for ransoms, bribes and subversion without check or regard for the consequences't Did it lie tc or influence the political lead- ers of the United States to such an extent that it really was an "invisible government" more powerful than even the President? These are questions constantly asked around the world. Some of them were raised again recently when it was disclosed that Michigan State University was the cover for some CIA agmts in South Vietnam during a multimilli m-dollar technical assistance program the university conducted for the regime of the late President Ngo Dinh Diem. Last week, It also became known that an Estonian ref ages who was being sued for slander in a Federal district court in Balti- more was resting his defense on the fact that the alleged slander had been committed in the course of his duties as a CIA agent. In a public memorandum addressed to the court, th) CIA stated that it had ordered the agent, Juri Raus, to disclose no further details of the case, in order to protect the Nation's foreign intelligence apparatus. Mr. Raus is clai ning complete legal immunity from the suit on the ground that he had acted as an official agent of the Federal Government. Such inck ents, bringing the activities of the CIA into dim and often dismaying public view, have caused Members of Congress and many publications to question ever more persistently he role and propriety of one of Washington's most discussed and least un- derstood institutions. Some of the misgiv- ings have been shared by at least two Amer- ican Presidents, Harry S. Truman and John F. Kennedy. A. WIDE EXAMINATION To seek reliable answers to these ques- tions; to sift, where possible, fact from fancy and thebry from condition; to determine what real questions of public policy and international relations are posed by the ex- istence and 3perations of the CIA. The New York Times has compiled information and opinions from informed Americans through- out the world. It has obtained reports from 20 foreign correspondents and editors with recent serv- ice in more than 35 countries and from re- porters in Washington who interviewed more than 50 pram ent and former Government offi- cials, Members of Congress and military officers. This study, carried out over several months, disclosed, for instance, that the Singapore af- fair resulted not from a lack of political con- trol or from recklessness by the CIA, but 'from bad fortune and diplomatic blundering. It round ;hat the CIA, for all its fearsome reputation, .5 under far more stringent politi- cal and budgetary control than most of its critics know or concede, and that since the Bay of Pigs disaster in Cuba in 1961 these controls have been tightly exercised. The consensus of these interviewed was that the critics' favorite recommendation for a stronger rein on the Agency?a con- gressional committee to oversee the CIA? would probably provide little more real con- trol than now exists and might both restrict the Agency's effectiveness and actually shield it from those who desire more knowledge about its operations. A MATTER or VvIl.r. Other important conclusions of the study include the following: While the institutional forms of political control appear effective and sufficient, it is really the will of the political officials who must exert control that is important and that has most often been lacking. Even when the control is tight and effec- tive, a more important question may concern the extent to which CIA information and policy judgments affect political decisions in foreign affairs. Whether or not political control is being exercised, the more serious question is whether the very existence of an efficient CIA causes the U.S. Government to rely too much on clandestine and illicit activities, back-alley tactics, subversion and what is known in official jargon as "dirty tricks." Finally, regardless of the facts, the CIA's reputation in the world Is so horrendous and its role in events so exaggerated that it is becoming a burden on American foreign policy, rather than the secret weapon it was intended to be. ? Tho Singapore incident, with its bizarre repercussions 5 years later, is an. excellent lesson in how that has happened, although none of the fears of the critics are justified by the facts of the particular case. PRODLE1VL IN SINGAPORE The ill-fated agent who blew out the lights flew from Tokyo to Singapore only after a pro- longed argument inside the CIA. Singapore, a strategic Asian port with a large Chinese population, was soon to get its independence from Britain and enter the Malaysian Feder- ation. Should CIA recruit some well-placed spies, or should it, as before, rely on MI-6, the British secret service, and on. Britain's ability to maintain good relations and good sources in Singapore? ? Allen. W. Dulles, then director of the CIA, decided to infiltrate the city with its own ? agents, to make sure that the British were sharing everything they knew. Although the decision was disputed, it is not uncommon in any intelligence service to bypass or double- check on an ally. (On Vice President HuMPHREY'S visit late last year to the capitals of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines, Secret Service agents found at least three "bugs," or listening devices, hidden in his private quarters by one of his hosts.) The agent who flew from Tokyo to Singa- pore was on a recruiting mission, and the lie detector, an instrument used by the CIA on its own employees, was intended to test the reliability of a local candidate for a spy's ,job. When the machine shorted out the lights in the hotel, the visiting agent, the would-be spy and another CIA man were discovered. They wound up in a Singapore jail. There they were reported to have been "tortured"? either for real, or to extract a ransom. THE PRICE WAS Him Secret discussions?apparently through CIA channels?were held about the possi- bility of buying the agents' freedom with increased American foreign aid, but Wash- ington eventually decided Singapore's price was too high The men were subsequently released. Secretary of State Dean Rusk?the Ken- nedy administration had succeeded to office in January l961-wrote a formal apology to Premier Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and promised to discipline the culprits. That appeared to have ended the matter until last fall, when Premier Lee broke away from the Malaysian Federation and sought to establish himself for political reasons as more nearly a friend of Britain than of the United States, although his anti-American- ism was short of procommunisna. To help achieve this purpose, Mr. Lee dis- 9111 closed the 1960 "affront" without giving any details, except to say that he had been offercd a paltry $3.3' million bribe when he had de- manded $33 million. The State Department, which had been routinely fed a denial of wrongdoing by CIA officials who did not know of the Rusk apol- ogy, described the charge as false. Mr. Lee then published Mr. Rusk's letter of 1961 and threatened also to play some interesting tape recordings for the press. Hastily, Washington confessed?not to the bribe offer, which is hotly denied by all offi- cials connected with the incident, or to the incident itself, but to having done some- thing that had merited an apology. London, infuriated in the first instance by what it considered the CIA's mistrust of MI-6, now fumed a second time about clumsy tactics in Washington.. ACTING ON ORDERS Errors of bureaucracy and mishaps of chance can easily be found in the Singapore incident, but critics of the CIA cannot easily Said in it proof of the charges so often raised about the agency?"control," "making policy," and "undermining policy." The agent in Singapore was acting on dl- root orders from Washington. His superiors in the CIA were acting within the directives of the President and the National Security Council. The mission was not contrary to American foreign policy, was not undertaken to change or subvert that policy, and was not dangerously foolhardy. It was not much _ more than routine?and would not have been unusual in any intelligence service in the world. Nevertheless, the Singapore incident?the details of which have been shrouded in the CIA's enforced secrecy?addad greatly to the rising tide of dark suspicion that many peo- ple throughout the world, including many in this country, harbor about the agency and its activities. Carl Rowan, the former director of the U.S. Information Agency a,nd former Ambas- sador to Finland, wrote last year in his syndi- cated column that "during a recent tour of east Africa and southeast Asia, it was made clear to me that suspicion and fear of the CIA has become a sort of Achilles heel of American foreign policy." President Sukarno of Indonesia, Prince Norodom Sihanouk, Cambodia's Chief of State, President Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya, former President Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and many other leaders have repeatedly in- sisted that behind the regular American government there is an "invisible govern- ment," the CIA, threatening them all with infiltration, subversion and even war. Com- munist China and the Sov?iet Union sound this theme endlessly. "The Invisible Government" was the phrase applied to American intelligence agencies, and particularly the CIA, in a book of that title by David Wise and Thomas B. Ross. It was a bestseller in. the United States and among many government officials abroad, SUBJECT Or HUMOR So prevalent is the CIA reputation of men- ace in so much of the world that even hu- morists have taken note of it. The New Yorker magazine last December printed a cartoon showing two natives of an unspe- cified country watching a volcano erupt. One native is saying the other: '"Phe CIA did it. Pass it along." In southeast Asia, even the most rational leaders are said to be ready to believe any- thing about the CIA. "Like Dorothy Parker and the things she said, " one obs6rver notes, "the CIA gets credit or blame both for what it does and for many things it has not even thought a doing." NO. 73_4pproved For Release 2003/03/25: CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 Approved F% Release 2903/03/25 : CIA-RDP69132R290500020016-2 9112 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD?SENATE Many earnest Americans, too, are bitter critics of the-CIA . Senator EUGENE J. MCCARTHY, Democrat, of Minnesota, has charged that the agency. "Is making foreign policy and in_so doing is as- suming the roles of President and Congress." He has introduced a proposal to create a spe- cial Foreign Relations Subcommittee to make a "full and complete" study of the effects of CIA operations on U.S. foreign relations. Senator STEPHEN M. YOUNG, Democrat, Of Ohio, has proposed that a joint Senate-House commit ;ee oversee the CIA because, "wrapped in a cloak of secrecy, the CIA has, in effect, been making foreign ,policy." Mayor Lindsay of New York, while a Repub- lican Member of Congress, indicated the CIA on the House floor for a long series of fi- ascos, including the most famous blunder in recent tmeric,an history?the Bay of Pigs in- vasion of Cuba. Former President Truman, whose admin- istration established the CIA in 1947, said in 1963 1,hat by then he saw "something about the way the CIA has been functioning that Is casting a shadow over our historic posi- tions, and I feel that we need to correct it." KENNEDY'S BTFrkRNESS And President Kennedy, as the enormity of the ay of Pigs disaster came home to him, said to one of the highest officials of his ad- ministration that he wanted "to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds." Even some who defend the CIA as the in- dispensable eyes and ears of the Govern- ment?!or example Allen Dulles, the Agency's most famous Director?now fear that the cumula bive criticism and suspicion, at home and abeoad, have impaired the CIA's effee- tivenesi, and therefore the Nation's safety. They are anxious to see the criticisms an- swered and the suspicions allayed, even if? in some cases?the Agency should thus be- come score exposed to domestic politics and to compromises of security. "If tee establishment of a congressional committee with responsibility for intelligence would elliet public fears and restore public confidence in the CIA," Mr. Dulles said in an interview, "then I now think it would be worth doing despite some of the problems it would cause the Agency." Because this view is shared in varying de- gree by numerous friends of the CIA and be- cause its critics are virtually unanimous in calling for more "control," most students of the problem have looked to Congress for a remedy. In the 19 years that the CIA has been in existence, 150 resolutions for tighter con- greseiosal control have been introduced? and put aside. The statistic in itself is evid- ence oi widespread uneasiness about the CIA and of how little is known about the Agency. For ihe truth is that despite the CIA's in- ternational reputation, few persons in or out of the American Government know much -about its work, its organization, its super- vision or its relationship to the other arms of the executive branch. A former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for instance, had no idea how big the CIA budget was. A Senator, experienced in foreign affairs, proved in an interview, to know very little about, but to fear very much, Its operations. Many critics do not know that virtually all CLL expenditures must be authorized in advance?first by an administration commit- tee that includes some Of the highest-rank- ing pc litical officials and White House 'staff assistants, then by officials in the Bureau of the Budget, who have the power to rule out or redece an expenditure. The y do not know that, instead of a blank check, the CIA has an annual budget of a little more than $500 million?only one-sixth the $2 billion the Government spouts on its overall intelligence effort. The National Sc- became a troublesome and costly burden. pretext for the murder of the leading Indo- purity Agengk? F orteedaFOr Reletilte 200e3f0MV:tsCIWIRDP68EfOOP4132R01/05thYnetV1U2.2 breaking operation run by the Defense De- partment, and almost never questioned by outsiders, spends twice as much as the CIA. The critics shrug aside the fact that Presi- dent Kennedy, after the most rigorous in- quiry into the Agency's affairs, methods and problems after the Bay of Pigs, did not splinter it after all and did not recommend congressional supervision. They may be unaware that since then supervision of intelligence activities has been tightened. When President Eisenhower wrote a later to all ambassadors placing them in charge of all American activities in their countries, he followed it with a secret letter specifically exempting the CIA; but When President Kennedy put the ambassa- dors in command of all activities, he sent a secret letter specifically including the CIA. It is still in, effect but, like all directives, variously interpreted. OUT OF A SPY NOVEL The critics, quick to point to the Agency's publicized bhuiders and setbacks, are not mollified by its genuine achievements?its precise prediction of the date on which the Chinese Communists would explode a nuclear device; its fantastic world of electronic de- vices; its use of a spy, Oleg Penkovskiy, to reach into the Kremlin itself; its work in keeping the Congo out of Communist con- trol; or the feat?straight from a spy novel? of arranging things so that when Carnal Abdel Nasser came to pawer in Egypt the management consultant who had an office next to the Arab leader's and who was ono of his principal advisers was a CIA operative. When the U-2 incident is mentioned by critics, as it always is, the emphasis is usually on the CIA's?and the Eisenhower adminis- tration's?blunder in permitting Francis Gary Powers' flight over the Soviet Union in 1960 just before a scheduled summit con- ference. Not much is usually said of the in- calculable intelligence value of the undis- turbed U-2 flights between 1956 and 1960 over the heartland of Russia. And when critics frequently charge that CIA operations contradict and sabotage of- ficial American policy, they may not know that the CIA is often overruled in its policy judgments. As an example, the CIA strongly urged the Kennedy administration not to recog- nize the Egyptian-backed Yemeni regime and warned that President Nasser would not quickly pull his troops out of Yemen. Am- bassador John Badeau thought otherwise. His advice was accepted, the republic was recognized, President Nasser's troops re- mained?and much military and political trouble followed that the CIA had foreseen and the State Department had not. Nor do critics always give the CIA credit where it is due for its vital and daily service as an accurate and encyclopedic source of quick news, information, analysis and deduc- tion about everything from a new police chief in Mozambique to an aid agreement between Communist China and Albania, from the state of President Sukarno's health to the meaning of Nikita S. Khrushchev's fall from power. Yet the critics favorite indictments are spectacular enough to explain the world's suspicions, and fears of the CIA and its oper- ations. A sorry episode in Asia in the early 1950's is a frequently Cited example. CIA agents gathered remnants of the defeated Chinese Nationalist armies in the jungles of north- west Burma, supplied them with gold and arms and encouraged them to raid Commu- nist China. One aim was to harrass Peking to a point where it might retaliate against Burma, forc- ing the Burmese to turn to the United States for protection. Actually, few raids occurred and the army May 3, 1966 Sriyanod, the police chief of Thailand?and a leading narcotics dealer, The Nationalists, with the planes and gold furnished them by the agents, went into the opium business. By the time the "anti-Communist" force could be disbanded, and the CIA could wash its hands of it, Burma had renounced Amer- ican aid, threatened to quit the United Na- tions and moved closer to Peking. Moreover, some of the Nationalist Chinese are still in northern Burma, years later, and still fomenting trouble and infuriating gov- ernments in that area, although they have not been supported by the CIA or any Amer- ican agency for a decade. In 1958, a CIA-aided operation involving South Vietnamese agents and Cambodian rebels was interpreted by Prince Sihanouk as an attempt to overthrow him. It failed but drove him farther down the road that ultimately led to his break in diplomatic rela- tions with Washington. INDONESIAN VENT URE In Indonesia in the same year, against the advice of American diplomats, the CIA was authorized to fly in supplies from Taiwan and the Philippines to aid army officers rebel- ling against President Sukarno in Sumatra and Java. An American pilot was shot down on a bombing mission and was released only at the insistent urging of the Kennedy ad- ministration in 1962, Mr. Sukarno, naturally enough, drew the obvious conclusions; how much of his fear and dislike of the United States can be traced to those days is hard to say. In 1960, CIA agents in Laos, disguised as "military advisers," stuffed ballot boxes and engineered local uprisings to help a hand- picked strongman, Gen, Phourni Nosavan, set up a "pro-American" government that was desired by President Eisenhower and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. This operation succeeded?so much so that it stimulated Soviet intervention on the side of leftists Laotians, who counterattacked the Phoumi government. When the Ken- nedy administration set out to reverse the policy of the Eisenhower administration, it found the CIA deeply committed to Phoumi Nosovan and needed 2 years of negotiations and threats to restore the neutralist regime of Prince Souvanne, Phouma. Pro-Communist Laotians, however, were never again driven from the border of North Vietnam, and it is through that region that the Vietcong in South Vietnam have been supplied and replenished in their war to de- stroy still another CIA-aided project, the non-Communist government in Saigon. CATALOG OF CHARGES It was the CIA that built up Ngo Dinh Diem as the pro-American head of South Vietnam after the French, through Emperor Bao Dai, had found him in a monastery cell in Belgium and brought him back to Saigon as Premier. And it was the CIA that helped persuade the Eisenhower and Kennedy ad- ministrations to ride out the Vietnamese storm with Diem?probably too long. These recorded incidents not only have prompted much soul searching about the influence of an instrument such as the CIA on American policies but also have given the CIA a reputation for deeds and misdeeds far beyond its real intentions and capacities. ?_Through spurious reports, gossip, misun- derstandings, deep-seated fears and forgeries and falsifications, the Agency has been ac- cused of almost anything anyone wanted to accuse it of. It was been accused of: Plotting the assassination of Jawaharlal Nehru, of India. Provoking the 1965 War between India and Pakistan. ' Engineering the "plot" that became the May 3, 1966 Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE Supportina the rightist army plots in. Al- geria. Murdering Patrice Ltmuunba, in the Congo. Kidnaping Moroccan agents in Paris. Plotting the overthrow of President Kwame Nkru aaah, of Ghana. All of these charges and many similar to them are fabrications, authoritative officials outside the (TA insist. The CIA's notoriety even. enables some enemies to recover from, their own mistakes. A former American official unconnected with the Agency recalls that pro-Chinese ele- ments in ease Africa once circulated a docu- ment urging revolts against several govern- ments. When this inflammatory message backfired on its authors, they promptly spread the word that it was a CIA forgery de- signed to diseredit them?and some believed the falsehood. OBVIOUS DEDUCTION "Many otherwise rational African leaders are ready to take forgeries at face value," one observer says, "because deep down they honestly fear the CIA. Its image in this part of the world couldn't be worse." The image feeds on the rankest of fabrica- tions RS well as on the wildest of stories? for the simplc reason that the wildest of sto- ries are not a:ways false, and the CIA is often involved and all too often obvious. When an embassy subordinate in Lagos, Nigeria, known to be the CIA station chief had a fancies house than the U.S. Ambassa- dor, Nigerians made the, obvious deduction about who was in charge. When Preisdent Joe? Goulart of Brazil fell from power in 1961 and. CIA men were accused of being among his most energetic opponents, exaggerated conclusions as. to who had ousted lr m were natural. It is not only abroad that Such CIA in- volvements?seal or imaginary?have aroused dire fears and suspicions. Theodore C. Sor- ensen has written, for instance, that the Peace Corps is its early days strove manfully, and apparent .y successfully, to keep its ranks free of CIA infiltration. ? Other Government agencies, American newspapers and business concerns, charitable foundations, research institutions and uni- versities have, in some bases, been as diligent as Soviet agents in trying to protect them- selves from CIA penetration. They have not always been So successful as the Peace Corps. Some of their fear has been misplaced; the CIA is no longer so dependent on clan- destine agen n and other institutions' re- sources. But as in the case of its overseas reputation, its actual activities in the United States?for instance, its aid in financing a center for international studies at the Mas- sachusetts Institute of Technology?have made the fear of infiltration real to many scholars and businesses. ' The revelation that CIA agents served among Michigan State University scholars in South Vietnam from 1955 to 1959 has con- tributed to the fear. The nature of the agents' work and the circumstances of their employment are in dispute, but their very involvement, even relatively long ago, has aroused concern that hundreds of. scholarly and charitabie American efforts abroad will be tainted. and hampered by the suspicions of other governments. Thus, it is easy for sincere men to believe deeply that ethe CIA must be brought "to heel" in the Nation's own interest. Yet every well-Informed official and former official with recent knowledge of the CIA and its ac- tivities who was interviewed confirmed what Secretary of State Rusk has said publicly?. that the CIA "does not initiate actions un- known to the high policy leaders of the Gov- ernment." The New York Times survey left no doubt that, whatever its miscalculations, blunders and misfortunes, whatever may have been the situation during its b i urmot OUS earls _days an.dRelease the sar0ne_ tiMe Approved FM- 203/03/25 : CIA-RDP65B00142liiitIOS5OhairYvale mush- during its overhasty expansion in and after the Korean war, the Agency acts today not on Its own but with the approval and under the control of the political leaders of the U.S. Government. But that virtually undisputed fact raises in itself the central questions that emerge front the survey: What is control? And who guards the guards? For it is upon information provided by the CIA itself that those who must approve its activities are usually required to decide. It is the CIA that has the money (not un- limited but ample) and the talent (as much as any agency) not only to conceive but also to carry out projects of great importance? and commensurate risk. ACTION, IF NOT SUCCESS It is the CIA, unlike the Defense Depart- ment with, its service rivalries, budget con- cerns and political involvements, and unlike the State Department with its international diplomatic responsibilities and its vulnera- bility to criticism, that is freest of all agen- cies to advocate its projects and press home its views; the CIA can promise action, if not succesS. And. both the Agency and those who must pass upon its plans are shielded by security from the outside oversight and review under which virtually all other officials operate, at home and abroad. Thus, while the survey left no doubt that the CIA operates under strict forms of con- trol, it raised the more serious question whether there was always the substance of control. In many ways, moreover, public discussion has become too centered on the question of control. A more disturbing matter may be whether the Nation has allowed itself to' go too far in the grim and sometimes deadly business, of espionage and secret operations. One of the best-informed men on this sub- ject in Washingtoss described that business as "ugly, mean, and cruel." The Agency loses Men and no one ever hears of them again, he said, and when "we catch One of them" (a Soviet or other agent) , it becomes necessary "to get everything out of them and we dolt with no holds barred." Secretary Rusk has said publicly that there is a "tough struggle going on in the back alleys all over the world." "It's a tough one, it's unpleasant, and no one likes it, but that Is not a field which can be left entirely to the other side," he said. The back-alley struggle, he concluded, is "a never-ending war, and there's no quarter asked and none given." STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM But that struggle, Mr. Rusk insisted, is "part of the struggle for freedom." No one seriously disputes that the effort to gain intelligence about real or potential enemies, even about one's friends, is a vital part of any government's activities, particu- larly a government so burdened with respon- sibility as the U.S. Government in the 20th century. But beyond their need for information, how far should the political leaders of the United States go in approving the clandestine violation of treaties and borders, financing of coups, influencing of parties and govern- ments, without tarnishing and retarding those ideas of freedom and self-government they proclaim to the world? And how much of the secrecy and auton- omy necessary to carry out such acts can or should be tolerated by a free society? There are no certain or easy answers. But these questions cannot even be discussed knowledgeably on the basis of tho few glimpses?accidental or intentional?that the public has so far been given into the private world of the CIA. That world is both dull and lurid, often at 9113 A year ago, for instance, it was reported that some of the anti-Castro Cuban survivors of the Bay of Pigs were flying in combat in deepest, darkest Africa. Any Madison Avenue publisher would_ recognize that as right out of Ian Fleming and James Bond. But to the bookish and. tweedy men who labor in the pastoral setting of the CIA's huge building on the banks of the Potomac River near Langley, Va., the story was only a satisfying episode in the back-alley version of "Struggle for Freedom." How CIA PUT "INSTANT AIR FORCE" INTO CONGO?/NTERVENTION OR SPYING ALL IN A DAY'S Won't (Norm?Following is the second of five articles on the Central, Intelligence Agency. The articles are by a team of New York Times correspondents consisting of TOm Wicker, John W. Finney, Max Frankel, E. W. Kenworthy, and other Times staff members.) WASHINGTON, April 25.?At the Ituri River, 8 miles south of Nia Nia in the northeast Congo, a Government column of 600 Congo- lese troops and 100 white mercenaries had been ambushed by a rebel force and was under heavy fire. Suddenly, three B-26's skimmed in over the rain forest and bombed. . and strafed a path through the rebel ranks for the forces supported by the United. States. At the controls of the American-made planes were anti-Castro Cubans, veterans of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in 1961, 3 years before. They had been recruited by a purportedly private company in Florida. Servicing their planes were European me- chanics solicited through advertisements in London newspapers. Guiding them into ac- tion were American "diplomats" and other officials in apparently civilian positions. The sponsor, paymaster, and director of all of them, however, was the Central Intelli- gence Agency, with headquarters in Langley, Va. Its rapid and effective provision of an "instant air force" in. the Congo was the climax of the Agency's' deep involvement there. The CIA's operation in the Congo was at all times responsible to and. welcomed by the policymakers of the United States. It was these policymakers who chose to make the Agency the instrument of political and military intervention in another nation's affairs, for in 5 years of strenuous diplomatic effort it was only in Langley that the White House, the State Department, and the Penta- gon found the peculiar combination of tal- ents necessary to block the creation of a pro- Communist regime, recruit the leaders for a pro-American government, and supply the advice and support to enable that govern- ment to survive. IN DARK AND LIGHT Front wiretapping to influencing elections, from bridge blowing to armed invasions, in the dark and in the light, the Central In- telligence Agency has become a vital instru- ment of American policy and a major com- ponent of American Government. It not only gathers information but also rebuts an adversary's information. It not only organizes its own farflung. operations but also resists an adversary's operation. Against the Soviet Union alone, it per- forms not only certain, of the services per- formed in Moscow by the KGB, the Com- mittee for State Security, but also many of the political, intelligence and military services performed by pro-Soviet Communist parties around the world. When. tho Communist and Western worlds began to wrestle for control of tho vast, 'undeveloped Congo in 1960 after It had gained, independenee from Belgium, a modest Approved For, eleese 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP681300432R000500020016-2 9114 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE roomee, overnight into a virtual embassy and miniat are war department. This was not to compete with the real U.S. ESabassy and military attaches but to apply the secret, or at least discreet, capaci- ties a the CIA to a seething contest among many ronflicting forces. Starting almost from scratch, because the Belgiar s had forbidden Americans even to meet with Congolese officials, the CIA dis- persed its agents to learn Congolese politics from the bush on up, to recruit likely leaders and to finance their bids for power. Capa'sle of quickly gathering information from all sources, of buying informants, and disburs Mg funds without the bureaucratic restrair, ts imposed on other Government agenelea the CIA soon found Joseph Mo- butu, Victor Nendaka, and Albert Ndele. Their eventual emergence as President of the country, Minister of Transportation and head of the national bank, respectively, proved a tribute to the Americans' judgment and tactics. So Ix rvasive was the CIA influence that the agency was widely accused of the assas- sination of Moscow's man, Premier Patrice Lumumba. Correspondents who were in the Congo :Ire convinced the CIA had nothing to do with the murder, though it did play a major role in establishing Cyrille Adonis, as Mr. Lumumba's successor for a time. Money and shiny American automobiles, furnished through the logistic wizardry of Langley, are said to have been the deciding factors in the vote that brought Mr. Adoula to power. Russian, Czechslovak, Egyptian, and Gl.analan agents were simply outbid where tiny could not be outmaneuvered. In or ,e test after Mr. Adoula had been elected, rival agents of East and West almost stumbled over each other rushing in and out of parliamentary delegates' homes. On the day of the rollcall, American and Czech rep- resentatives sat one seat apart in the gallery 'with lists of members, winking at each other in triumph whenever a man pledged to the one turned out to have been picked off by the other. Ultimately M. Adonis, won by four votes. MORE THAN MONEY By the Congo period, however, the men at Lang .ey say they had learned that their earlier instincts to try to solve nasty political problema with money alone had been over- taken bY the recognition of the need for far more sophiptica,ted and enduring forms of influenc "Purchased?" one American commented. "You can't even rent these guys for the afternoo n." And so the CIA, kept growing in size and scope. By the time Tvrolso Tshombe had returned to powea in the Congo?through American acquiescence, if not design?it became ap- parent that hastily supplied arms and planes, as well as dollars and cars, would be needed to protect the American-sponsored Govern- ment in :Aopoldville. This, apparently, was a job for the Defense Department, but to avoid a too obvious American involvement, and in the interests of speed and efficiency, the Government again turned to the CIA. The Agency had the tools. It knew the Cubans In Miami anti their abilities as pilots. It had tte front organizations through which they couId be recruited, paid, and serviced. It could engage 20 British mechanics with- out legal complications and furnish the tac- tical expertise from its own ranks or from Americaiis under contract. Moreover, some CIA agents eventually felt compelle a to fly some combat missions them- selves in support of South African and Rhodesian mercenaries. The State Depart- ment denied this at first?then insisted the Americans be kept out of combat. But it was pleased by the overall success of the operation in which no planes were lost and all civilian targets were avoided. ? MEANWHILE, IN OTHER AREAS In the years of the Congo effort, the CIA was also smuggling Tibetans in and out of Communist China, drawing secrets from Col. Oleg Penkovsky of Soviet military intelli- gence, spying on Soviet missile buildups and withdrawals in Cuba, masterminding scores of lesser operations, analyzing the world's press and radio broadcasts, predicting the longevity of the world's major political lead- ers, keeping track of the world's arms traffic and of many arms manufacturing enterprises and supplying a staggering flow of informa- tion, rumor, gossip, and analysis to the Pres- ident and all major departments of Govern- ment. For all this, the CIA employs about 15,000 persons and spends about a half billion dol- lars a year. Its headquarters, the brain and nerve cen- ter, the information repository of this sprawling intelligence and operations system, is a modern, eight-story building of precast concrete and inset windows?a somewhat superior example of the faceless Federal style?set in 140 acres of lawn and woodland overlooking the south bank of the Potomac 8 miles from downtown Washington. In this sylvan setting, somewhat resem- bling an English deer park, about 8,000 C/A employees?the top managers, the planners, and the analysts?live, if not a cloistered life, at least a kind of academic one with the ma- terials they are studying or the plans they may be hatching. Formerly, the CIA was scattered through many buildings in downtown Washington, which increased the problems and expense of security. In the early 1950's, a $30 million appropri- ation for a new, unitary headquarters was inserted without identification in the budget of another agency?and promptly knocked out by a congressional committee so befud- dled by .CIA secrecy that it did not know what the item was for. When Allen W. Dulles, then Director of the CIA, came back in 1956 with more candor, he asked for $50 million, and Congress gave him $46 million. He justified the bite that he proposed to take out of a 750-acre Gov- ernment reservation on the Potomac by say- ing the site with "its isolation, topography, and heavy forestation" would provide the agency with the required security. While the whitish-gray building is un- doubtedly as secure as fences, guards, safes, and elaborate electronic devices can make it, the location is hardly a secret. A large sign on the George Washington Parkway pointing to "Central Intelligence Agency" has been removed, but thousands of people know you can still get to the same building by turning off on the same road, now marked by the sign "BPR"?"Bureau of Public Roads." There, beyond the affable guard at the gate, is the large, rectangular structure with four wings, the ground-level windows barred, which stands as the visible symbol of what is supposed to be an invisible operation. For organizational purposes, CIA head- quarters is divided into four divisions, each under a Deputy Director?plans, intelligence, science and technology, and support, WHAT THE DIVISIONS DO The Division of Science and Technology is responsible for keeping current on develop- ing techniques in science and weapons, in- cluding nuclear weapons, and for analyzing photos taken by U-2 reconnaissance planes and by space satellites. The Division of Support is responsible for procuring equipment and for logistics, com- munications and security, including the CIA Codes. May 3, 1:G.6 The Division of Plans and the Division of Intelligence perform the basic functions of the Agency. They represent the alpha and omega, the hand and brain, the dagger and the lamp, the melodrama and the monograph of the intelligence profession. Their pres- ence under one roof has caused much of the controversy that has swirled about the CIA since the Bay of Pigs. It is the responsibility of the Intelligence Division to assemble, analyze, and evaluate information from all sources, and to produce daily and periodical intelligence reports on any country, person, or situation for the President and the National Security Council, the President's top advisory group on defense and foreign policy. All information?military, political, eco- nomic, scientific, industrial?is grist for this division's mill. Perhaps no more than one- fifth?by volume and not necessarily impor- tance?comes from agents overseas under varying depths of cover. Most information is culled from foreign newspapers, scientific journals, industry publications, the reports of other Govern- ment departments and intelligence services and foreign broadcasts monitored by CIA stations around the world. Ara, soars Or EXPERTS The Intelligence Division is organized by geographical sections that are served by resident specialists from almost every pro- fession and discipline?linguists, chemists, physicists, biologists, geographers, engineers, psychiatrists and even agronomists, geol- ogists, and foresters. Some of the achievements of these experts are prodigious, if reports filtering through the secrecy screen are even half accurate. For instance: From ordinarily available information, re- liable actuarial and life-expectancy studies have been prepared on major foreign leaders, In the case of one leader, from not-so- ordinarily available information, physicians gleaned Important health data: They made a urinalysis from a specimen stolen from a hospital in Vienna where the great man was being treated. CIA shipping experts, through sheer ex- pertise, spotted the first shipment of Soviet arms to Cuba before the vessels had cleared the Black Sea. Some anthropologists at CIA headquarters devote their time to helpful studies of such minor?but strategically crucial?societies as those of the hill tribes of Laos and Vietnam. One woknan has spent her professional lifetime in the Agency doing nothing but collecting, studying, collating, analyzing, and reporting on everything that can be learned about President Sukarno of Indonesia?"and I mean everything," one official reported. HEAVY WITH PH. D.'S It is the Agency's boast that it could staff any college from its analysts, 50 percent of whom have advanced degrees and 30 percent of whom have doctorates. Sixty percent of the Intelligence Division personnel have served 10 years. Twenty-five percent have been with the CIA since 1947, when the Agency was established. The heaviest recruiting occurred during the Ko- rean war?primarily, but by no means exclu- sively, among Ivy League graduates. . The Division of Plans is a cover title for what is actually the division of secret opera- tons, or "dirty tricks." It is charged with all those stratagems and wiles?some as old as those of Rahab and some as new as satel- lites?associated with the black and despised arts of espionage and subversion. The operations of the CIA go far beyond the hiring and training of spies who seek out informers and defectors. It was the Plans Division that set up clan- destine "black" radio stations in the Middle Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 May 3, !966 Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 9115 East to counter the propaganda' and the open incitements to revolution and murder by Presislent Gamal Abdel Nasser's Radio Cairo. It was the Plans Division that master- minded the ouster of the Arbenz govern- ment in Guatemala in 1954, the overthrow of Premier Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran, in 1953 (two notable successes) and the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 (a resounding fail- ure). Among the triumphs of the Plans Division are the cleveLopment of the U-2 high-alti- tude plane, which between 1956 and May 1960, when Francis Gary Powers was shot down by a Soviet rocket, photographed much of the Soviet Union; the digging of a tunnel into East Berlin from which CIA agents tapped telephone cables leading to Soviet military headquarters in the East- ern Zone ani the acquisition of a copy of Premier Khruslichev's secret speech to the 20th party ccngress in 1956 denouncing Stal- in's excesses and brutalities. :ABERALS IN THE CIA The C/A onalysts of the Intelligence Di- vision, in the. opinion 'of many experts, are aware of the embedded antagonisms and frustrations of peoples Just emerging into nationhood. Thus they are likely to be more tolerant than the activists in the Plans Division of the flamboyant) nationalism and Socialist orientation of the leaders in former colonies and more flexible than many of the State Deparment's cautious and legalistic diplomats. In discussing the Portuguese territories of Angola of Mozambique, for example, tho analysts are said to take the attitude that change is inevitable, that the United States has to deal with a pluralistic world. The State Department, on the other hand, tends to be diverte4 by Portuguese sensitivities and the North Aelantic Treaty Organization base in the Azores, also a Portuguese territory. Regarding the CIA analysts, one State De- partment officer said that "there are more liberal intellectuals per square inch at CIA than anywh ire else in the Government." The operaeors and agents of the Plans Di- vision,? on the other hand, are described as more consereative in their economic outlook and more single minded in their anticom- munism. T is particularly true of those engaged in deep-cover operations, many of whom are es-military people or men former- ly in the Office of Strategic Services of the Federal Burs au of Investigation. It has been said, however, that many of the agents who are essentially information gatherers and who work under transparent cover are as sophisticated as the analysts back home, lend like them are sympathetic to the "anti-Communist left" in underde- veloped countries. The CIA agents abroad fall into two groups?both under the Plans Division. First, there are those engaged in the really dirty business?the-spies and counterspies, the saboteurs, the leaders of paramilitary operations, the suborners of revolution. Such agents opera to under deepest cover, and their activities be eome known only when they are unfortunate enough to be caught and "sur- faced" for political or propaganda purposes. While such operatives may be known to "the chief of station"?the top CIA officer in any counery?they are rarely known to the American nmbseesador, although he may sometimes DC aware of their mission. In fact, these t eep agents are not known to the CIA's Intelligence Division in Washington, and their reports are not 'identified to it by name. Correspondents of the New York Times say they have never, with certainty, been able to identify one of these agents, although they have On occasion run across some unaccount- able American of whom they have had their suspicions. Often the deep agents masquerade as businessmen, tourists, scholars, students, missionaries, or charity workers. Second, there are those agents, by far the larger number, who operate under the looser cover of the official diplomatic mission. In the mission register they are listed as politi- cal or economic officers, Treasury representa- tives, consular officers, or employees of the Agency for International Development (the U.S. foreign aid agency) or U.S. Information Agency. The CIA chief of station may be listed as a special assistant to the Ambassa- dor or as the top political officer. A THIN COVER This official cover is so thin as to be mean- ingless except to avoid embarrassment for the host government. These agents usually are readily identifiable. The chief of station is recognized as the man with a car RS big as the Ambassador's and a house that is sometimes?as in Lagos,. Nigeria?better. In practically all the allied countries the CIA agents identify themselves to host gov- ernments, and actually work in close co- operation with Cabinet officials, local intelli- gence, and the police. In some embassies the CIA agents outnum- ber the regular political and economic offi- cers. In a few they have made up as much as 75 percent of the diplomatic mission. The chief of station often has more money than the Ambassador. Sometimes he has been in the country longer and is better in- formed than the Ambassador. For all these reasons the host government, especially in underdeveloped areas of the world, may prefer to deal with the chief of station rather than the Ambassador, believ- ing him to have readier access to top policy- making officials in Washington. WELL KEPT SECRET Obviously the number of agents abroad is a closely held secret, kept from, even such close Presidential advisers in the past as the historian, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr, In his book "A Thousand Days," Mr. Schlesinger states that those "under official cover over- seas" number almost as many as State De- partment employees. This would be roughly 6,600. The actual number, however, is be- lieved to be considerably less, probably around 2200., The secrecy of identification can lead to some amusing situations. Once when Allen Dulles, then CIA Director, visited New Delhi, every known spook (CIA men) was lined up in an anteroom of the Embassy to greet him. At that moment a newspaper corre- spondent who had been interviewing Mr. Dulles walked out of the inner office. A look of bewilderment crossed the faces of the CIA men, plainly asking, "Is this one we didn't know about?" Mr. Schlesinger has written that "in some areas the CIA had outstripped the State De- partment in the quality of its personnel." Almost without exception, correspondents of the New York Times reported that the men at the tap overseas were men of "high competence and discipline," "extremely knowing," "imagiFfative," "sharp and schol- arly" and "generally somewhat better than those in State in work and dedication." But they also found that below the top many CIA people were "a little thin" and did not compare so favorably with Foreign Service officers on the same level. The CIA screens and rescreens applicants, because it is quite aware of the attraction that secrecy holds for the psychopath, the misfit, and the immature person. The greatest danger obviously lies in the area of special operations. Although it is generally agreed that the agents?overt and covert?have been for the most part men of Competence and character, the CIA has also permitted some of limited intelligence and screen and has even assigned them to sensi- tive tasks, with disastrous results. 'One example was the assignment of a man known as "Frank' Bender" as contact with Cuban exile leaders during the preliminaries of the Bay of Pigs operation. A German refugee with only a smattering of Spanish and no understanding of Latin America or Latin character, Bender antagonized the more liberal of the leaders by his bullying and his obvious partiality for the Cuban right. OFFICE.S IN THIS COUNTRY The CIA maintains field offices in 30 Amer- ican cities. These offices are avert but dis- creet. Their telephone numbers are listed under "Central Intelligence Agency" or "U.S. Government," but no address is given. Anyone wanting the address must know the name of the office director, whose telephone number and address are listed. At one time these field offices sought out scholars, businessmen, students, and even ordinary tourists whom they knew to be plan- ning a trip behind the Iron Curtain and asked them to record their observations and report to the CIA on their return. Very little of this assertedly is done any more, probably because of some embarrassing arrests and imprisonment of tourists and students. While the CIA deals frankly with businessmen, it reputedly does not compro- mise their traveling representatives. Most of the work of domestic field agents involves contacts with industry and univer- sities. For example, an agent, on instruc- tions from headquarters, will seek evaluation of captured equipment, analysis of the color of factory smoke as a clue to production, an estimate of production capacity from the size of a factory, or critiques of articles in techni- cal and scientific journals. THE HUMAN INADEQUACY In greater secrecy, the CIA susidizes, in whole or in part, a wide range of interprises? "private" foundations, book and magazine publishers, schools of international studies in universities, law offices, "businesses" Of vari- ous kinds, and foreign broadcasting stations, Some of these perform real and valuable work for the CIA. Others are not much more than "mail drops." ' Yet all these human activities, all the value received and the dangers surmounted, all the organization and secrecy, all the trouble averted, and all the setbacks , encountered, still do not describe the work of the CIA. For the most gifted of analysts, the most crafty of agents?like all human beings? have their limitations. At the time when the Americans were suc- cessfully keeping the Congo out of the Com- munist orbit, it still took the same men sev- eral months to slip an African agent into Stanleyville in the Congo to check on the lives and fate of some arrested Americans. Men are fallible and limited, and the de- mands on the CIA are almost infinite; that is why, today; some of the most valuable spies are not human and some of the most omni- potent agents hum through the heavens, and above. CIA SP/ES FROM 100 MILES UP; SATELLITES PROSE SECRETS OF SOVIET?ELECTRONICS PRY- ING Greeves (NOTE?Following is the third of five arti- cles on the Central Intelligence Agency. The article are by a team of New York Times car- reSpondents consisting of Tom Wicker, John W. Finney, Max Frankel, E. W. Kenworthy, and other Times staff members.) WASHINGTON, April 26.?To the men most privy to the secrets of the Central Intelli- gence Agency, it sometimes seems that the human spies, the James Bonds, and Meta Harts, arc obsolete. Like humans everywhere, they are no match for the computers, cam- eras, radars, and other gadgets by which na- tions can now gather the darkest secrets of *woe% erIrViealeildolid57M11.tbi?4160?61161664'irRiirra and foes. Approved For Release 2_903/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 9116 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE , With cc mplex machines circling the earth at 17,000 'miles an hour, CIA agents arc able to relax ia their carpeted offices beside the Potomac and count the intercontinental mis- siles poised in Soviet Kazakhstan, monitor the conversation between Moscow and a Soviet submarine near Tahiti, follow the countdown of a sputnik launching as easily as that of a Gemini capsule in Florida, track the electeonic imprint of an adversary's bombers and watch for the heat traces of his missiles. Only a half dozen years ago, at least one human pilot was still required to guide a black U-2 jet across the Soviet Union from Pakistan t a Norway, or over Cuba or Commu- nist Chine from bases in Florida and Taiwan. His cameras and listening devices, capable of picking out a chalk line or a radar sta- tion from 1.5 miles up, were incredible in their day, the product of imaginative CIA re- search and developments. But spies in the sky now orbiting the earth do almost as well from 100 niles up. ? COSMIC ESPIONAGE Already, the United States and the Soviet Union are vying with each other in cosmic spying. American Samos and Soviet Cosmos satellites gather more data in one 90-minute orbit than an army of earthbound spies.. Other gadgets of the missile age have taken over the counterspy function. Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara gave a congres- sional cora mittee a strong hint about that last year when he mentioned "inspection of orbiting objects in the satellite interceptor Thor program as well as in the two large ground-bared optical programs at Cloudcroft, N. Mex." His testimony suggested that the United States could orbit a satellite capable of pho- tographing and otherwise "inspecting" Soviet space spies, while other equipment could photograph them from the ground with re- markable detail. Such electronic eyes, ears, noses and nerve .ends?and similar ones aboard ships and submarines?are among the Nation's most vital secrets. They are not exclusively the property or inspiration of the CIA. CIA cameras and other snooping equip- ment are riding in spacecraft that are other- wise the responsibility of the Defense De- partment. No clear breakdown of responsibilities and cost is available, but, altogether, the annual cost of the U.S. intelligence effort exceeds 83 billion sk year?more than six times the amount spteifically allocated to the CIA and more than 2 percent of the total Federal budget. DITGGING PROM AFAR Not all the gadgetry is cosmic. The Agency is now developing a highly sensitive device that will pi ek up from afar indoor conversa- tions, by recording the window vibrations caused by she speakers' voices. This is or ly one of many nefarious gadgets that have made the word "privacy" an anachronism. It is possible, for instance, with equipment so tiny as to be all but in- visible, to turn the whole electric wiring sys- tem of a building into a quivering transmit- ter of conversation taking place anywhere within. Picking up information is one thing; get- ting it "hone" and doing something with it Is another. Some satellites, for instance, are rigged to emit capsules bearing photos and other readings; as they float to earth by para- chute, old C-130 aircraft dash across the Pacific from Hawaii and snare the parachutes with long, dangling, trapezelike cables. The planes have a 70-percent catching average. Sometimes the intelligence wizards get carried away by their imaginations. Several years ago ti ey spent tens of millions of dol- lars on the construction of a 600-foot radio_ telescope designed to eavesdrop on the Krem- lin. It was to pickup .radio signalp .K1 those emitted when a Soviet Premier called his chauffeur by radiotelephone, as they bounced off the moon. . The project turned into an engineering fiasco, but technology came to the rescue by providing "ferret" satellites that can tune in on the same short-range radio signals as they move straight up to the ionosphere. Overlooking the rights of territorial sov- ereignty and national and human privacy, officials throughout the U.S. Government praise the CIA's. gadgetry as nothing short of "phenomenal." The atmosphere everywhere, they say, is full of information, and the ob- jective of a technological intelligence service Is to gather and translate it into knowledge. At CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., other intricate machines, some unknown a decade or even a few years ago, read, translate, in- terpret, collate, file, and store the informa- tion. Sometimes months or years later, the data can be retrieved from tens of millions of microfilmed categories. This effort has paid off monumentally, ac- cording to those who know most about it. - It was aerial reconnaissance by the U-2 spy lane?succeeded in many ways by satel- lites in 1061?that enabled Washington to anticipate and measure the Soviet. Union's capacity to produce missiles in the 1950's. These estimates, in turn, led to the so-called "missile gap," which became a prime polit- ical issue in the 1960 presidential campaign. But It Was also the U-2, that later produced proof that the Russians were not turning out missiles as fast as they could, thus dispelling the "missile gap" from Washington's think- ing and jargon. Still later, CIA devices discovered missiles being emplaced underground in the Soviet Union. U-2's spotted the preparation of missile sites in Cuba in 1962. They also sam- pled the radioaetive fallout of Soviet nuclear tests in 1961. Highly secret techniques, in- cluding aerial reconnaissance, allowed the CIA to predict the Chinese nuclear explosion in 1964 with remarkable accuracy. PURLO/NED MESSAGES Countless conversations and messages the world over have been purloined; even subtler signals and indications, once detected by the marvels of science, can be read and combined into information of a kind once impossible to obtain. The first duty of the CIA is to collect, Interpret and disseminate what it learns from its worldwide nerve system?weaving together, into the intelligence the Govern- ment needs, every electronic blip, squeak, and image and the millions of other items that roach its headquarters from more conven- tional, often public, sources: random. diplo- matic contacts, press clippings, radio moni- tor reports, books and research projects and eyewitness evidence. (Even some of these open sources, such as a regional newspaper from Communist China, must be smuggled or bought at a stiff price.) Every hour of every day, about 100 to 150 fresh ? items of news, goSsip and research reach the CIA's busy headquarters in Vir- ginia and are poured into the gigantic human and technological computer that its analysis section resembles. Four of every five of these items, it is said, now come either from open sources or in- animate devices. But in many important instances it Is still the human agent, alerted to make a particular arrangement or to chase a specific piece of information, who provides the link that makes all else meaningful and significant; sometimes, now as in the 18th century, it is men alone who do the job in danger and difficulty, When it was discovered, for instance, that Premier Khrushchey had shaken the Com- munist world with ' a secret speech de- nouncing Stalin in 1956, it was a CIA agent who finally came up with the text, some- May 3, 1966 A REBELLION HASTENED This feat of human spying in an elec- tronic age yielded vital information and, leaked to the press in Europe and elsewhere hastened the anti-Stalin rebellions in many Communist countries and probably contrib- uted to unheavals in Poland and Hungary that are still among the heaviest liabilities of Communist history. It takes a subagent in Tibet, personally recruited by a CIA man there and paid either a retainer or by the piece, to deliver a sheaf of secret army documents circulating among regimental commanders of Communist China's People's Liberation Army. Only his counterpart 151 Algeria Can pro- vide some drawings of the design of the interior of Peking's embassy (although such designs can often be obtained with no more effort than asking for them at the offices of the American who constructed the building). And beyond this large remaining value of the human being in the humming world of espionage, it is also the human brain in the CIA that gives !formation its real im- portance by supplying interpretations for the President and his men. , The end product is a series of papers, hand- somely printed and often illustrated with fancy maps to gain a bureaucratic advantage over a rival pieces of paper from other agencies. The Agency produces intelligence reports almost hourly, and sweeping summaries every day. It provides a special news report for President Johnson's nightly bedtime reading, sometimes containing such juicy tidbits as the most recent playboy activities of the indefatigable President Sukarno of In- donesia. More elaborate reports and projections are prepared on such matters as the rate of So- viet economic growth. The State Department has sometimes pub- lished these, without credit to their origin. Piqued by these announcements, the CIA called its first news conference in 1904 to put out the latest readings on Soviet prosperity. The idea of the "spooks," as CIA men are called, summoning reporters caused so much amusement in Washington?and perhaps displeasure in other agencies?that the CIA has never held another news conference. Still more important subjects, such as So- viet nuclear capabilities or Communist Chi- nese intentions in southeast Asia, are dealt with in formal national intelligence esti- mates. These encompass all information available on a given subject-and reflect the final judgment of the Board of National Esti- mates, a group of 14 analysts in the CIA. National estimate intelligence is intended to reach a definite conclusion to guide the President. But as other departments are consulted and the various experts express their views, their disagreements, caveats and dissents are noted and recorded by footnotes in the final document. These signs of dis- puto are likely to herald important uncer- tainties, and some officials believe the foot- notes to be the best read lines of all the millions committed to paper in the Govern- ment every month. The CIA also produces rapid analyses and predictions on request?say, about the like- lihood of the Soviet Union's going to war over the Cuban missile crisis, or about the conse- quences of different courses of action con- templated at a particular moment by the United States in Vietnam. HoW Goon ARE THE REPoRTs9 How effective these reports have been, and how well they are heeded by the policymak- ers, are questions of lively debate in the in- telligence community. In recent years, the CIA is generally be- lieved to have been extremely good in fur- nishing information about Soviet military capabilities and orders of battle about the Where in Poland, and other analysts who Chinese nuclear weapons program and, after deterrittlik 51A4 tirrupp68BooeneMattii51601 6,12 White House, Approved or e ease May 3,,1956. Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 9117 about the progress of India, the United Arab Republic, Israel, and other nations toward a capacity to bui3d nuclear weapons. Reports from Inside Indonesia, Algeria, and the Congo duriag recent fast-moving situ- ations are also mid to have been extremely good. On the other hand, the CIA has been criti- cized for not having known more in advance about the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1901, about the divorce of the United Arab Republic end Syria in -1961, about the political leaninss of various leaders in the Dominican Republic, and about such rela- tively public matters as party politics in Italy. Some?Inducing Dwight D. Eisenhower? have criticized the Agency for not having recognized in time Fidel Castro's Communist leanings or the possibility that the Soviet Union would ship missiles to Cuba. Almost everyone, however, generally con- cedes the neces3ity for gathering intelligence to guide the Government in its worldwide involvements. Criticism goes beyond the value or aceuracy of CIA reports, For infora mation-gathering often spills over at the scene of action into something else?subver- sion, counteractivity, sabotage, political, and economic inteevention and other kinds of "dirty tricks." Often the intelligence gath- erer, by design or force of circumstance, be- comes an activist in the affairs he was set to watch. ON-THE-SCENE ACTION CIA analyst 3 reading the punchcards of their computers in Virginia can determine that a new youth group in Bogota appears to have fallen under the control of suspected ,Communists, 'gut it takes an agent on the spot to trade information with the local police, collect photographs end telephone tape of those involved, organize and finance a countermovement of, say, young Christiana or democratic labor youth, and help them erect billboards and turn Mimeograph ma- chines at the 'next election. Dozens?at times hundreds?of CIA men have been ermel.oyed on Taiwan to train men who will be smuggled into Communist China and to interview defectors and refugees who come out; to irain Chinese Nationalists to fly the U-2; to ic.entify and befriend those who will move inta power after the departure of , the Nationalists' President Chiang Kai-shek; to beam propaganda broadcasts at the main- land; to organize harassing operations on the islands juat off the shore of the mainland, and to provide logistic support for other CIA operations in Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines,I,nd Indonesia. In these and dozens of other instances, an agent who is merely ostensibly gathering in- telligence is in reality an activist attempting to create or resolve a situation. Because a great many such activists are also in the lied for a variety of purposes other than open or clandestine information gath- ering, the involvement of fallible human be- ings in the nest dangerous and murky areas of CIA operations causes most of the Agency's failures and difficulties and gives it its fear- some reputation. Men, by and large, can control machines but not events, and not always themselves. It was not, after all, the shooting down of a U-2 inside Soviet Union in 1860 that caused worlt.wide political repercussions and a Soviet-American crisis; each aide could have absorbed that in some sort of "cover." It was rather the Soviet capture of a living American p-lot, Francis Gary Powers, that could not ba explained away and that Rus- siaria did no; want explained away. But the CIA invariably develops an inter- est in its peojects and can be a forMidable advocate in the Government, When it presented the IT-2 program in 1956, fear oi detection and diplomatic reper- cussions lei. the Eisenhower administration to run some "practice" missions over Eastern Europe. The first mission to the Soviet Union, in mid-1956, over Moscow and Lenin- grad, was detected but not molested. It did, however, draw the first of a number of secret diplomatic protests. After six missions the administration halted the flights, but the CIA. pressed for their resumption. Doubts were finally over- come, and 20 to 25 more flights were con- ducted, with Soviet fighter planes in vain pursuit of at least some of them. The Powers plane is thought to have been crippled by the nearby explosion of an anti- aircraft missile developed. with the U-2's in mind. RISICY AND OFTEN PROFITABLE The simplest and most modest of such risky, often profitable, sometimes disastrous human efforts are reported to be carried out In the friendly nations of Western Europe. In Britain, for instance, CIA agents are said to be little more than contact men with British intelligence, with British Krernlinol- ?gists and other scholars and experts. With MI-0, its London counterpart, the CIA compares notes and divides responsibili- ties on targets of mutual interest. The Agency, having come a painful cropper in Singapore a few years ago, now leaves spying in Malaysia, for instance, to the old Coin- monwealth sleuths while probably. offering In return the CIA's copious material from Indonesia. Generally cooperative arrangements also prevail in countries such as Canada and Italy and, to a somewhat lesser degree, in France. In West Germany, a major cold war battle- ground, the CIA is much more active. The CIA runs an office in Bonn for general coordination. Another in Berlin conducts special activities such as the famous wiretap tunnel under East Berlin, a brilliant tech- nical hookup that eavesdropped on Soviet Army headquarters. It was exposed in 1956 when East German workmen, digging on an- other project, struck a weak spot in the tunnel and caused it to collapse. A CIA office in Frankfurt supervises some of the United States own espionage operas tions against the Soviet Union, Interviews defectors and recruits agents for service in Communist countriea. In Munich, the CIA supports a variety of research groups and such major propaganda outlets as Radio Free Europe, which broad- casts to Eastern Europe, and Radio Liberty, aimed at the Soviet Union. JOBS roa REFUGEES Besides entertaining and informing mil- lions of listeners in Communist nations, these nominally "private" outlets provide employment for many gif ted and knowledge- able refugees from Russia, Poland, Hungary, and other countries. They also solicit the services of informers inside the Communist world, monitor Com- munist broadcasts, underwrite anti-Come munist lectures and writings by Western intellectuals and distribute their research materials to scholars and journalists in all continents. But there is said to be relatively little- direct CIA spying upon the 'U.S. allies. Even in such undemocratic countries as Spain and Portugal, where more independ- ent CIA activity might be expected, the op- eration is reliably described as modest. The American Agency has a special inter- est, for instance, in keeping track in Spain of such refugees from Latin America as Juan Peron of Argentina. Nevertheless, it relies so heavily on the information of the Span- ish police that American newspapermen are often a better source for American Embassy officials than the CIA office, In much of Africa, too, despite the formi- dable reputation It has among governments, the CIA takes a back seat to the intelligence agencies of the former colonial nations, Brit- ain and France, and concentrates on gather- ing information about Soviet, Chinese, and other Communist efforts there. (The Congo has been the major exception.) The Agency compiles lists of travelers to Moscow, Prague, or Peking, attempts to infiltrate their embas- sies and cheeks on arrns and aid shipments through African airfields, ? AN EYE ON POTENTIAL REBELS The Agency is thought to have attempted to infiltrate the security services of some African countries but only with mixed suc- cess. It gathers special dossiers on the ac- tivities of various nationalist and liberation movements and befriends opposition lead- ers in such countries as Algeria and the United Arab Republic, in the hope that it can predict upheavals or at least be familiar with new rulers if their bids for power are successful. The CIA, long in advance, had information on the plan by which Algerian Army officers overthrew Ahmed Ben Bella last June?built did not know the month in which the officers would make their move, and it had nothing to do with plotting or carrying out the coup. Thanks to contacts with Genial Abdel Nasser before he seized power in Egypt, the CIA had almost intimate dealings with the Nasser government before theeUnited States drew his ire by reneging on its promised aid to build the Aswan Dam. Some of these Egyptian ties lingered even through the recent years of strained rela- tions. Through reputed informants like Mustafa Amin, a prominent Cairo editor, the CIA is said in the United Arab Republic to have obtained the details of a Soviet- Egyptian arms deal in 1964 and other similar information. Thus, Mr. Amin's arrest last fall may have closed sonic important chan- nels and it gave the United Arab Republic the opportunity to demand greater American aid in return for playing down its "evidence" of CIA activity in Cairo. A TALENT FOR SECRET WAS. Tho CIA's talent for secret warfare is known to have been tested twice in Latin America. It successfully directed a battle of "liberation" against the leftist govern- ment of Col. Jacob? Arbenz Guzman In Guatemala in 1951. Seven years later, a CIA-sponsored army jumped off from secret bases in. Guatemala and Nicaragua for the disastrous engagement at Cuba's Bay of Pigs. Not so melodramaticaly, the Agency runs dozens of other operations throughout the hemisphere. It provides "technical assistance" to most Latin nations by helping them establish anti- Communist police forces. It promotes anti- Communist front organizations for students, workers, professional and businesemen, farmers, and political parties. It arranges for contact between these groups and Ameri- can labor organizations, institutes, and foun- dations. It has poured money into Latin American election campaigns In support of moderate candidates and against leftist leaders such as Cheddi Jagan, of British Guiana. It spies upon Soviet, Chinese, and other Communist infiltrators and diplomats and attempts to subvert their programs. When the CIA learned last year that a Brazilian youth had been killed in 1963, allegedly in an auto accident, while studying on a scholarship at the Lumumbe, University in Moscow, it mounted a massive publicity cam- paign to discourage other South American families from sending their youngsters to the Soviet Union. In southeast Asia over the last decade, the CIA has been so active that the Agency in some countries has been the principal arm of American policy. It Is said, for instance, to have been so successful at infiltrating the top of the Indo- Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP681300432R000500020016-2 Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 ---a 9118 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE May 8, 1966 nesian eovernment and Army that the and publication. Or the Agency may channel contributions without revealing its ties to United S bates was reluctant to disrupt CIA research and propaganda money through the U.S. Government. covering operations by withdrawing aid and foundations?legitimate ones or dummy Radio Swan, a CIA station in the Carib- information programs in 1961 and 1965. fronts, bean that was particularly active during the What was presented officially in Washington The CIA, is said to be behind the efforts Bay of Pigs invasion, maintains unpublreized as toleration of President Sukaxno's insults of several foundations that sponsor the contacts with private American broadcasters. and provocations was in much larger measure travel of social scientists in the Communist The CIA at times has addressed the Amer- a desire lo keep the CIA fronts in business as world. The vast majority of independent ican people directly through public relations long as possible. foundations have warned that this practice men and nominally independent citizens Thoug a it is not thought to have been in- caste suspicion on all traveling scholars, and committees. Many other CIA-run fronts and volved in any of the maneuvering that has in the lazt year the CIA is said to have cur- offices, however, exist primarily to gather curbed President Sukarno's power in recent tailed these activities somewhat, mail from and to provide credentials for its months, the Agency was well poised to follow Congressional investigation of tax-exempt overseas agents. . , events and to predict the emergence of anti- foundations in 1961 showed that the J. M. Thus, the ramifications of CIA activities, Commur ist forces. Kaplan Fund, Inc., among others, had dis- at home and abroad, seem almost endless. LINKS TO POWETt bursed at least $100,000 for the CIA in a Though satellites, electronics, and gadgets single year to a research institute. This in- have taken over much of the sheer drudgery After aelping to elect Ramen Magsaysay stitute, in turn, financed research centers in of espionage, there remains a deep involve- as President of the Philippines in 1953, but- Latin America that drew other support from ment of human beings, who project the tressing the family government of Ngo Dinh the Agency for International Development Agency into awkward diplomatic situations, Diem and Ngo Dinh Nhu in South Vietnam (the U.S. Foreign Aid Agency), the Ford raising many issues of policy and ethics. in 1951, and assisting in implanting the re- Foundation and such universities as Harvard gime of the strong man Phoumi Nosavan in and Brandeis. That is why many persons are convinced that in the CIA a sort of Frankenstein's Laos in 960, the CIA agents responsible oh- Among the Kaplan Fund's other previous monster has been created that no one can viously became for long periods much more contributors there had been eight funds or fully control. intimate advisers and effective links to foundations unknown to experts on tax- Washing-;on than the formally designated exempt charitable organizations. Five of By its clandestine nature, the CIA has few opportunities to explain, justify, or defend American Ambassadors in those countries. them were not even listed on the Internal And when the Kennedy administration Revenue Service's list of foundations entitled itself. It can don the cloak of secrecy and label all its works as necessary to further came into office in 1961, the President con- to tax exemption. some "national interest." And it can quietly eluded that the C/A had so mortgaged Amer- ? lean interests to Phoumi Nosavan that there MAGAZINE GOT FUNDS lobby for support inside the Government and was at lirst no alternative to dealing with Through similar channels, the CIA has among influencial Members of Congress and him. supported groups of exiles from Cuba and with the President. Morecerer, the CIA's skill at moving quickly refugees from Communism in Europe, or But a "national interest" that is not a and in reasonable secrecy drew for it many anti-Communist but liberal organizations of persuasive defense to men who have their assignnunts in southeast Asia that would intellectuals such as the Congress for Cul- own ideas of the "national interest"--along normally be given to the Defense Depart- tural Freedom, and some of their newspapers with secrecy itself?has the inevitable effect meat. It was able, for instance, to fly sup- and magazines. of convincing critics that the Agency has plies to the Meo tribesmen in Laos to help Encounter magazine, a well-known anti- plenty to hide besides its code-books. them fight against the pro-Communist Communist intellectual monthly with edi- The imaginations and consciences of such Pathet Lao at a time when treaty obligations tions in Spanish and German as well as Eng- critics are certainly not set at rest when they forbade the assignment of American military lish, was for a long time?though it is not advisers sa the task. now?one of the indirect beneficiaries of CIA learn, for instance, that in 1962 an outraged In See.th Vietnam, the CIA's possession of funds. Through arrangements that have President Kennedy?obviously differing with energetic young men with political and never been publicly explained, several Ameri- the Agency about the "national interest"? forced the CIA to undo a particularly clumsy linguisitic talents proved much more success- can book publishers have also received CIA piece of sabotage that might have blackened ful in wresting mountain and jungle villages subsidies. the Nation's name all around the world. from Coinrnunist contrOl than the Pentagon's An even greater amount of CIA money ap- special f areas. parently was spent on direct, though often But the CIA was also deeply committed to secret, support of American scholars. The CIA OPERATION: A PLOT Sem-rem?PLAN To the Ngo brothers and was tricked by them Massachusetts Institute of Technology DOCTOR CUBAN SUGAR DEPICTS CONTROL Into supporting their private police forces. opened a Center of International Studies , PROBLEM Then ws,re eventually employed against the with a grant of $300,000 from the CIA in (Norm?Following is the fourth of five ar- Buddhist political opposition, thus provoking 1951 and continued to take agency funds tides on the Central Intelligence Agency. the coup d'etat by military leaders in 1963 until the link was exposed, causing great The articles are by a team of New York that bro aght down the Ngos. embarrassment to MIT's scholars working Times correspondents consisting of Tons In Thailand, the CIA has now begun a in India and other countries. Wicker, John W, Finney, Max Frankel, E. W. program of rural defense against Communist The Agency's support for IVDT Projects Kenworthy and other Times staff members.) subversion. Acting through foreign aid of- gradually dwindled, but the fear of compro- WASHINGTON, April 27.?On August 22, flees ant, certain airlines, agents are working mising publicity led the university to decide 1962, the S.S. Streatham Hill, a British with hit, tribes along the Burmese and Laos a year ago to accept no new CIA contracts, freighter under Soviet lease, crept into the borders and helping to build a provincial Similar embarrassment was felt at Mich- harbor of San Juan, P.R., for repairs. police network along the borders of Laos and igen State University after the recent dis- Bound for a Soviet port with 80,000 bags of Cambod a. closure that CIA agents had served on its Cuban sugar, she had damaged her propeller FURTIVE OPERATIONS ' payroll in a foreign-aid project in South on a reef. Vietnam from 1955 to 1959. The university Few Americans realize how such operations The ship was put in drydock, and 14,135 as these may affect innocent domestic situp,- contended that no secret intelligence work sacks were offloaded to facilitate repairs. tions?tie extent to which the dispatch of a was done by the agents, but it feared that a Because of the U.S. embargo on Cuban im- planelond of rice by a subsidized carrier, Air dozen other overseas projects now under way ports, the sugar was put under bond in a America in Laos causes the Agency to set would be hampered by the suspicions of furtive operations in motion within the other governments. customs warehouse. United :itates. The CIA was among the first Government Sometime during the layup, agents of the When Air America or any other false- agencies to seek the valuable services of Central Intelligence Agency entered the cus- front oi ganizations has run into financial American scholars?an idea now widely toms shed and contaminated the offloaded difficulties, the Agency has used its influence emulated. Many scholars continue to serve sugar with a harmless but unpalatable sub- in Washington and throughout the United the Agency as consultants, while others work stance. States to drum up some legitimate sources on research projects frankly presented to Later, a White House official, running of income, their superiors as CIA assignments, through some intelligence reports, came Unknown to most of the directors and At a meeting of the American Political upon a paper indicating the sabotage. Ho stoekhceders of an airline, for instance, the Science Foundation here last fall, however, investigated, had his suspicions confirmed, CIA MaY approach the leading officials of the at least two speakers said too many scholars and informed President Kennedy, much to company, explain its problem and come away were still taking on full-time intelligence the annoyance of the CIA command. with some profitable air cargo contracts. services. They also warned that the pert- The President was not merely annoyed: time activities of others could influence their In otner domestic offshoots of the CIA's he was furious, because the operation had foreign dealings, American newspaper and judgments or reputations. taken place on American territory, because it ma,gazino publishers, authors and univer- Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty pro- would, if discovered, provide the Soviet sitics ace often the beneficiaries of direct or vide cover for CIA-financed organizations Union with a propaganda field day, arid be- indirect CIA subsidies, that draw upon the research talents of cause It could set a terrible precedent for A secret transfer of CIA funds to the State American scholars and also service scholars chemical sabotage in the undeclared "back- Department or U.S. Information Agency, for with invaluable raw material. The Free alley" struggle that rages constantly between example, may ileipprovedePticIFteletsseE2001702P26?. ECIPesREA2138B06432R0tY080111)2069r6n-lnist countries. May 3, 1966. Mr. Kennedy directed that the doctored sugar not leave Puerto Rico. This was more easily ordered than done, and it finally re- quired the ccmbined efforts of the CIA, the. Justice Depaetment, the Federal Bureau of. Investigation. the State Department, cus- toms agents and harbor authorities to die- intrigue the tatrigue. The Soviet Union never got its 14,135 sacks . of sugar; whether it was compensated for them has no: been disclosed. It would be unfair to conclude that this was a typical CIA operation. On the other nand, it cannot be dismissed as merely the unwise inverr ;ion of some agent who let his anti-Commurist fervor get out of control. There is good reason to believe that a high-level po:itleal decision had been taken to sabotage, where feasible, the Cuban econ- omy. The st gar project, harum-scarum as It was, develcped from a general policy de- termination in the Plans Division of the CIA, and the gene ral policy, if not the specific plot, presumably had the approval of the interagency, sub-Cabinet group responsible for reviewing all operations that could have political consequences. This was not, then, a well-laid plan that went sour in the operation; it was a badly laid plan that was bound to cause trouble. It is instructive because it illustrates many of the centre]; problems in CIA operations and makes pain why, from the outset, so many questicns have been so persistently raised by so many critics about the ade- quacy of these controls. A MAJOR CONCERN Pint there is the preeminent concern whether the (DIA, despite its disclaimers to the contrary, does on occasion make policy-- not willfully, perhaps, but simply because of its capacity to mount an operation and pursue it wherever it may lead without day- by-day guidance or restriction from the pol- itical departments of the Government. Operations' like that of sabotaging the Cuban economy can lead to such dangerous episodes as the sugar doctoring; they can ac- quire a momentum and life of their own, the consequences af which cannot be anticipated by political officers who may have given them original approval. Thus, it should be noted that, in the sugar tampering, the CIA and its agents unques- tionably believed they were operating within approved instructions, and consequently re- sented what they regarded as "interference" by the White House officer who reported it to the President. Another example of operations assuming a life of their mm occurred in 1954 during the CIA-engineered revolution against the Com- munist-oriented . President of Guatemala, Jacob? Arbena Guzman. A P-38 fighter, piloted by an American, bombed a Blitish ship, the Spring-Fjord, which was lying off-shore and was believed to be carrying aircraft to the Arbenz govern- Mont. Only one of the three bombs exploded, and no crew members were injured. The ship, which was actually carrying coffee and cotton, was beached. Richard M. Bissell, a former CIA deputy director for plans, has admitted that the bombing was a "sub-incident" that "went beyond the es i ablished limits of policy." An outstanding example of an operation with political =sequences was the dispatch of Francis Gary Powers on the U-2 flight from Pakistan to Norway across the Soviet Union on May 1, 1060, just befOre the Paris summit meeting and the scheduled visit of President Eisenhower to Moscow. Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE UNRESOLVED QUESTION The U-2 photoreconnaissance flights had been going on for nearly 6 years, with fabu- lously profitable results. It was established practice for the President to approve in ad- vance a set of flights within a given time span, and there was also established machin- ery for the approval of each flight by the Secretary of Defense. Yet, to this day, no one then in the top councils of the Govern- ment is able to say with certainty whether the Powers flight, the last in a series of six, was specifically approved by Thomas S. Gates, Jr., then the Secretary of Defense. One Senator has said that the U-2 flight was a perfectly legitimate operation of great value, and that the embarrassment to the President was not inherent in the project but was the result of a lack of coordination and controls. "The operation," he said, "just went along regardless of the political circumstances." A second serious control question derives from the special position of the CIA as the Government's fountain of necessary infor- mation. This appears to be at once the ma- ? jor advantage and a principal hazard of the CIA operation today. "Polley," Allen W. Dulles, the former CIA Chief, once said, "must be based on the best estimates of the facts which can be put to- gether. That estimate in turn should be given by some agency which has no axes to grind and which itself is not wedded to any particular policy." This point is often made by the CIA and its defenders. They cite, for instance, the Agency's accurate estimate on Soviet missile strength, as a contrast to the inflated esti- mates that came from the Pentagon in the late fifties. The latter, they say, were surely influenced by service rivalries and budgetary battles?such as the Air Force's desire for more missiles of its own. The, CIA has no such vested interest and little to gain by dis- torting or coloring its reports and estimates. Mr. Dulles?like Secretary of State Dean Rusk?insists that no CIA operation "of a political nature" has ever been undertaken "without appropriate approval at a high po- litical level in our Government" outside the CIA. The problem is that the facts presented to the Government by the CIA are some- times dramatic and inevitably tend to in- spire dramatic proposals for clandestine op- erations that the Agency's men are eager VO carry out, and that they believe can?or might?succeed. LONG ODDS CAN HELP Even long odds sornetimes work to the Agency's advantage. General Eisenhower, for instance, has written that he undertook to aid pro-Western rebels in Guatemala in 1954 because Mr. Dulles told him the opera- tion had only a 20-percent chance to succeed. If the CIA Director had estimated a better chance than that, GeneralEisenhower wrote in his memoirs, he would have been un- realistic, unconvincing and overruled. Command of the facts?at least the best facts available?plus zeal to do something about them, many critics fear, can make the CIA an unanswerable advocate, not for a vested budgetary or policy interest, but for its own sincere notions of how to proceed. And its advantage of providing the facts on which decision must be made, these critics feel, can enable it to prevail over the advice or fears of political officers. ? Thus, in 1958, Ambassador John Allison strongly opposed the plan of Allen Dulles to aid the rebel movement in Sumatra 'against President Sukarno of Indonesia. But Mr. Dulles had won the powerful support of his brother, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. Ultimately, the plan went forward?with the result that an American pilot was shot down and captured by the Sukarno forces, causing a conspicuous deterioration of rela- tions between Indonesia and the United States. The plan was not unapproved; it was just unwise. 9119 A third problem of control arises from the necessary secrecy that surrounds the Agency. To protect -its sources of information, to per- mit it to proceed with any form of clandes- tine operations, to guard the Nation's politi- cal relations with most other countries, it is necessary for the CIA to be shielded?and Congress has so shielded it, by law?from the ordinary scrutiny, investigation and pub- lic disclosure of activities that other Govern- ment agencies must undergo. Within the Agency, until the Bay of Pigs disaster of 1961 in Cuba, even the Intelli- gence Division was not allowed to know about the "dirty tricks" being planned and carried out by the Plans Division. STEVENSON IN THE DARK Many of the highest Government officials are told nothing of some of.the Agency's ac- tivities because, in the course of their own duties, they do not "need to know." It is now well established, for instance, that until the disaster unfolded, Adlai E. Stevenson, the U.S. representative to the United Nations, knew nothing of the Bay of Pigs plan. As a result, he and his Govern- ment, suffered grievous humiliation after he publicly misstated the facts, In years past, CIA secrecy reached some ab- surd proportions--with high-level employees identifying themselves solemnly at cocktail parties as "librarians" and "clerks." In its early days, for instance, CIA employees who, in their private lives, needed to apply for credit were instructed by the Agency to say, when asked for an employer's reference: "Call Miss Bertha Potts" at a certain number. It was not long, of course, before the lend- ers who were told to call Miss Potts would say gleefully: "Oh, you work for the CIA." For many years prior to 1961, a good many critics had been aware of the control dan- gers inherent in the CIA's peculiar position, In 1954, Senator WInen MAN-sins/A Democrat, of Montana, obtained 34 cosponsors for a bill to create a 12-member joint committee on intelligence to keep watch over the CIA, much as the Congressional Joint Conamitttee on Atomic Energy does over the Atomic Energy Commission. Allen Dulles, who was completely satisfied with the scrutiny provided by four carefully selected subcommittees of the Senate and House Armed Services and Appropriations Committees, went to work. He succeeded in cutting away 14 of Mr. Mnaisrizues cospon- sors, and the bill was defeated, 59 to 27. DOARD HEADED 137 KILLIAN A year later the second Hoover Conunission also recommended a congressional joint committee, as well as a presidentially ap- pointed board of consultants on intelligence activities. To forestall the first, Mr. Dulles acquiesced In the second, and in January 1965, President Eisenhower named a board of consultants on foreign intelligence activities, with James R. Killian, Jr., president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as chairman. Those familiar with the board's work in the Eiesnhower .years say it performed a useful function on the technical side, where Dr. Killian, for instance, was a powerful advocate in the development of the U-2. However, It is generally agreed that the board did not give very critical attention to "black" operations, and then only after the fact. In 1954 there was also established by the- National Security Council?which advises the President on defense and foreign policy matters?what came to be known as "the special group," or the "54-12 group," after the date (December 1954) of the secret di- rective ordering its formation. This directive also provided the basic charter for the agency's countersubversive and, counter-Communist activity. Until 1\T?. 73-9 Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 Approved Fori Release _2_1003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68B00432R000500020016-2 IL20 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE that time, these activities had been under- the chairmanship. (Mr. Clifford became a taken ur der authority of a secret memoran- member and later succeeded Dr. Killian as slum from President Truman issued in 1947 chairman.) The President directed the and ins ?ired principally by the Italian, committee to investigate the whole intelli- Czechosl svak and Berlin situations, then gence community from "stem to stern," roc- acute ca d-war issues. ommend changes and see that they were The 5a-12 group was?and still is?corn- carried out. posed of the President's special assistants for Third, after a decent interval, the Prost- national security affairs, the Director of the dent replaced Allen Dulles with John A. Mc- CIA., the Deputy Secretary of Defense and Cone, a former Chairman of the Atomic En- the Under Secretary (or Deputy Under Sec- ergy Commission. He told the new Director rotary) sf State for Political Affaire, plus that he was not to be simply the Director of other off cers consulted occasionally on par- the CIA but should regard his primary task ticular proposals. as "the coordination and effective guidance The g:oup seems to have been created, of the total U.S. intelligence effort." Mr. partly at' least, in response to public con- Dulles' key assistants were also removed. cern over the problem of control, and it was Fourth, the President sent a letter to every given re Tonsibility for passing on intent- Ambassador telling him he was "in charge of genes) operations beforehand. However, be- the entire diplomatic mission" at his post, cause of the fraternal relationship of Allen including not only foreign service personnel Dulles and John Foster Dulles, because of but "also the representatives of all other their cicse relations with President Eisen- U.S. agencies." These representatives of bower and because Allen Dulles had the other agencies were to keep the Ambassador power to give it the facts on which it had to "fully informed of their views and activities" base its decisions, the 54-12 group during and would abide by the Ambassador's deci.- the Eisenhower administration is believed by sions "unless in some particular instance you knowledgeable sources to have exercised and they are notified to the contrary." little control. The President followed this letter, which was made public, with a secret communica- tion, saying he meant it and specifically in- cluding CIA men among those responsible to the Ambassador. A BLOW TO. BUNDY Perhaps the most important change in control procedures, however, involved the 54-12 group within the political ranks of the Administration, and it came without any Presidential initiative. The Bay of Pigs had dealt a severe psy- chological blow to McGeorge Bundy, who as the President's Assistant for National Secu- rity Affairs was a member of the group, and perhaps also..to his self-esteem. Thereafter he set out tightening up the surveillance of CIA operations, subjecting them to search- ing analysis before and not after the event. The hard-eyed Mr. Bundy was notably re- lentless at that kind of administration. The President accepted the advice of the Taylor and Killian investigations on two im- portant questions. First, he decided not to limit the CIA to intelligence gathering and not to shift clan- destine operations to the pentagon, or to a special agency created for the purpose. These ideas had found favor among some sections of the State Department, among many public critics and even among some members of the staff of the advisory commit- tee. But it was stoutly opposed by Allen Dulles, who argued that this would result in duplication and rivalry, and that the two functions were interdependent, though he admitted that they had not been working in harness on the Bay of Pigs operation. The two committees of inquiry agreed with Mr. Dulles, and so, finally, did the Presi- dent. Second the committees recommended, and the president enthusiastically agreed, that the CIA should leave sizable military opera- tions to the Pentagon and henceforth limit itself to operations of a kind in which U.S. involvement would be "plausibly deniable." This, however, has proved to be a rule of thumb in which it is often difficult to hide the thumb. SOMETHING LIKE SECRECY For instance, the later creation of an air force of anti-Castro Cubans to fly for the Congolese Government was carried out and managed by the CIA, not by the Pentagon, despite the recommendation. The obvious reason was that the Agency could do the job in something like secrecy, while Defense Department involvement would have been necessarily more open, ad- vertising the backing of the United States THE CLASSIC DISASTER At tha Bay of Pigs, just after President Kennedy took office in 1951, the worst finally happened; all the fears expressed through the years came true. The Bay of Pigs must take its place in history as a classic example of the disaster that can occur when a major international operation is undertaken in deepest secrecy, . is politic ally approved on the basis of facts provided by those who most fervently advo- cated it, is carried out by the same acivo:- cates, and ultimately acquires a momentum of its o vn beyond anything contemplated either by the advocates or those who sup- posedly controlled them. Responsible officials of the Eisenhower ad- ministra nen report, for instance, that the invasion plan was not even in existence, as such, wa en they went out of office on Janu- ary 19, 1)01; there was nothing but a Cuban refugee :'orce, available for whatever the in- coming administration might ultimately de- cide to do with it. Yet the testimony of Kennedy administra- tion off cials?Theodore C. Sorenson and Arthur 1d. Schlesinger, Jr., for instance?is that the matter was presented to Mr. Ken- nedy by the CIA advocates as if it were al- ready cammitted to it and would have to cancel it rather than approve it. Mr. Soren- sen even wrote in his book, "Kennedy," that Mr. Kennedy had been subtly pushed to be no less "hard" in his anti-Castroism than President Eisenhower supposedly had been. The ultimate disaster and its various causes need no retelling. Their effect was graphically described by an official who saw the shaken Mr. Kennedy immediately after- ward. The President, he said, "wanted to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter lb to the winds." At the same time, to Clark M. Clifford, a Washine ton lawyer and close friend, who had written the legislation setting up the CIA during the Truman administration, Mr. Ken- nedy said flatly and poignantly: "I co aid not survive another one of these." AN INQUIRY ORDERED But because he could not simply abolish the Agency, much less its function, the Presi- dent decided he would "get it under control." First, he ordered a thorough investigation by a groap headed by Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor and composed also of Allen Dulles, Adm. Arleigh Burke, Chief of Naval Operations, and Attorney General ROBERT F. KENNEDY. Second, on Mr. Clifford's advice, the Presi- dent recreated the old board of consultants under the title Of the Foreign Intelligence May 3, 1966 It is beyond dispute, however, that the Bay of Pigs was a watershed in the life of the CIA and its influence on policymaking. Before that, no matter how much adminis- trative control and political approval there may have been, Mr. Dulles ran the Agency largely as he saw fit. We was able to do so because he could almost always get "approval"?and thus ad- here to the forms of control?from his broth- er in the State Department or from Presi- dent Eisenhower, with both of whom he had the closest relations of trust and liking. The effect of the Kennedy shakeup was Immediately apparent?an policy in Laos, for instance. W. Averell Harriman, then the Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, was given a free hand in getting rid of the American puppet, Premier Phomni Nosavanwhose backing by the CIA Presi- dent Eisenhower had specifically approved? and reinstating Souva,nna Phouma at the head of a neutralist government. By general agreement of virtually every official interviewed, the CIA does not now directly make policy, and its operations are under much more rigorous surveillance and control than before. Nevertheless, there con- tinue to be?and probably always will be? instances where the controls simply do not work. UNCERTAIN BOUNDARIES Richard Bissell, who as deputy director for plans was largely responsible for the U-2 re- connaissance triumph and for the Bay of Pigs disaster, has explained why this must , be. "You can't take on operations of this scope," he has said, "draw narrow bound- aries of policy around them and be absolutely sure that those boundaries will never be overstepped." Recently, for instance, the CIA -was ac- cused of supporting Cambodian rebels who. oppose Prince Norodom Sihanouk, the head of state. Even some senior U.S. Foreign Service officers said they were not sure that the agency's firm denials meant no agent in the field, no obscure planner in the huge CIA building in Virginia, had strayed from the strict boundaries of policy. A high degree of control of CIA activities exists, however, and inquiry produced this picture of the controlling agencies and how well the control works: ? THE 54-12 GROUP The 51-12 group is the heart of the control system. Its members now are Adm. William F. Raborn, the CIA director; U. Alexis John- son, Deputy Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs; Cyrus R. ? Vance, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and two presidential assistants, Bill D. Moyers and Walt W. Roe- tow, who have replaced McGeorge Bundy in representing the White House. This group nieets once a week with a de- tailed agenda. It concentrates almost ex- clusively on operation-s. It approves all pro- posed operations and it passes in great detail on expenditures as small as $10,000 that have political implications or could prove em- barrassing if discovered. Any differences are referred first to the Cabinet level and then, if necessary, to the President. While the group approves every "black" Operation, it does not necessarily clear all the routine intelligence-gathering activities of the agency. Nor, once approval has been given for a "black" operation, does it main- tain a running supervision over every detail of its execution. Under a given policy decision approving a guerrilla operation- In a certain country, for instance, the 54-12 group might also have to approve eomething as specific and important as a bridge blowing. But the overall pro- gram would go on by itself under the dices- Committee anc4115MVelalln rIckgegsdoklijictitier:tiA-RDP68B0043214tobtaiiti2616M12 May 3, :,!966 Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 _ CONGRESSP RECORD ? SENATE 9121 BL REAU OF THE BUDGET Another form of control is that of the pursestring. The CIA's onnuaI request for funds, which is hidden larEely in the Defense Department budget, is responsibility of the head of the Budget Bureau's International Division. The request has usually fared well, but in the fiscal year 1905, for the first time in several years, it was cut back sharply by the Bureau. Another form of budgetary control centers on the Agency's "slush fund," which used to be about $100-million a year and is now in "the tens of millions." One official has said that "the CD, can't spend a dollar without Bureau of Budget approval." But another official put a somewhat different light on how the "slus:a fund" is handled. Suppose, he said, that country X is having an election and the candidates backed by the 'MS. Government seem headed for defeat. The Ambassador and the CIA station chief? the Agency's chief in that country?may for- ward a reques; for some fast money to spread around. The requese, when reviewed and cleared by the middle levels of the State Department and the CIA, goes to the 54-12 group for review. ? This group will first decide whether the money should be spent, how the CIA should spend it and how much should be made available. Then the request goes to the Budget Bureau to be justified in. budget terms against other needs. A CALL BRINGS THE MONEY For example, this official said, one such project was recently trimmed by the Budget Bureau from IS to $1.7 million. But in the last week of the election, the CIA ran out of funds just as it needed some more billboards plastered, and it was able to get the money simply by a phone call to the Budget Bureau. This official explained that there had to be some way of providing aquick-turn money" Under tight ccntrols and audit. It should also be noted that this form of Control is purely budgetary and not substan- tive, Tho Bureau of the Budget does not interpose any policy judgment but simply weighs a proposed operation against total money available and tile outlays for other projects. FOREIGN IF TELLIGENCE ADVISORY BOARD Another control Agency is the Foreign In- telligence Advisory Board. This group has nine members. Four have had extensive gov- ernment experience. The chairman, Clark Clifford, was special counsel to President Truman from 1916 to 1950. Among the other members, Robert D. Murphy, former career Ambassador and for- mer Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, has had personal experience in clan- destine ?punt .ons, for he prepared the way for the American landing in North Africa in 1942. He is new a director of Corning Glass. Gordon Gra, a director of the R. J. Reyn- olds Co. and a newspaper owner, was Secre- tary of the Army under President Truman and later was President Eisenhower's special assistant for national security affairs. Frank Pace, Jr., ?hal 'man of the Special Advisory Board, Air Forte Systems Command, was di- rector of the 13'ireau of the Budget in 1949-50 and Secretary of the Army from 1950 to 1953. Two members are scientists connected with industry?Will-am 0. Baker, vice president in charge of research for the Bell, Telephone Laboratories, o member for many years of the Science Advisory Board of the Air Force, and Edwin H. :,and, chairman and president of the Polaroid Corp., a former adviser to the Navy on guided missiles and an expert on photography. There are two military representatives? South Vie' 7,nd Admiral John H. Sides, commandel -nef of the Pacific Fleet from 1900 to 196: William L. Langer, the ninth member, le ,essor of history at Harvard and a freee. e Government consultant. The boar- eaeets an average of 1 or 11/x days a mos. It is subdivided into two- man. panel, epecializing Ill various fields, which Meet more frequently. Individual members also take field inspection trips. Mr. Clifford went recently to South Vietnam; Mr. Gray has been on extensive trips to the Mid- dle East and southeast Asia. There is divergent opinion on the control value of this board. Some of its members are highly pleased with their own work. They point out that over the last 41/2 years they have made some 200 recommendations, of which the President accepted 95 percent. They take credit for persuading President Kennedy and Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara to create the Defense Intelligence Agency, combining the separate service in- - telligence divisions. This had been recom- mended by Secretary of Defense Cates and by Lyman Kirkpatrick, inspector general of the CIA, as a result of the widely differing estimates of the so-called "missile gap" in the late 1950's made by the intelligence arms of the services. Another official in a position of authority, however, believes that, the board does little more than provide a "nice audit" of CIA op- erations and that any "control" it exercises is largely ex post facto. He asked what could be expected from a board that met only a few days a month. "By 5 in the afternoon," he said, "the guys can't remember what they were told in the morning." Even the members concede that their work has beers aimed primarily at improving the efficiency and methods of the CIA, rather than at control of individual operations. Thus, if the board does investigate some "black" operations, its emphasis is placed on whether it was done well or could have been more successful, rather than on the political question of whether it should have been done at all. One member reported, however, that the CIA now brought some of its proposals to the committee for prior discussion, if not spe- cific approval. This is not an unmixed bless- ing. While the board might advise against some risky scheme, it also might not; in the latter case its weight added to that of the CIA, would present the responsible political of- ficials in the 54-12 group with an even more powerful advocacy than usual. An advantage of the board is its direct link to the President. Since this is augmented, at present, by Mr. Clifford's close personal and political ties to President Johnson, any rec- ommendations the committee makes carry great weight with the bureaucrats of the CIA, even before they appear in a Presidential or- der. STATE DEPARTMENT AND AMBASSADORS Also exercising some control over the CIA are the State Department and Ambassadors, Secretary of State Rusk has confided to his associates that he is now quite certain the CIA is doing nothing affecting official policy he does not know about. But he added that he was also sure he was the only one in the State Department informed about some of the things being done. Despite this information gap as high as file Under Secretary and Assistant Secretary levels, State Department officers with a need to know are far better informed about opera- tions than before the Bay of Pigs. Moreover, in the 54-12 group and in inter- agency intelligence meetings, State Depart- ment officers are now more ready to speak out and more likely to be heeded on proposed President Kennedy's secret letter to the Ambassadors also had some effect in chang- ing a dangerous situation. In 1951, William J. Sebald resigned as Am- bassador to Burma because of continued CIA support to Chinese Nationalists in north- ern Burma despite all his protests. In 1956, James B. Conant, Ambassador to West Ger- many, was not told about the tunnel under East Berlin. In 1960, in Laos, Ambassador Winthrop G. Brown was often bypassed as the CIA helped prop up the American-backed Premier Phoumi Nosavan, against his advice. The same year, the Ambassador in Malaysia knew nothing of the Singapore operation that ultimately was to embarrass the State De- partment in 1965. It is doubtful whether such things could happen today if an Ambassador is forceful enough in establishing his authority. In the last 4 years the Ambassadors have been kept much better informed, and their relations with CIA chiefs of station have been consequently more cordial. Ambassa- dors Clare Timberlake and Edward Gullion were completely posted on CIA operations during the Congo crisis and worked closely with the Agency. So, apparently, was Henry Oabot Lodge after he took over the Embassy in Saigon in 1963. While the Ambassador may not always` be completely master in his own house, neither does it seem to be true?as a staff report of Senator HENRY M. JACKSON'S Subcommittee on National Security Staffing and Operations said in 1962?that the primacy of the Am- bassador, supposedly established by the Ken- nedy letter, was largely "a polite fiction." For example, Robert F. Woodward, Ambas- sador to Spain, vetoed a man chosen to be the CIA's Spanish station chief. And the State Departnaent, while still complaining about the size of some CIA stations, is now .supposed to approve the number of agents in each diplomatic mission. In secret testimony before the Senate For- eign Relations Committee iii the summer of 1065, Under Secretary of State Thomas C. Mann made plain that the creation of the Imbert military junta in the Dominican Republic in May was a State Department, and not a CIA, idea. Asked whether the CIA would have set up the Junta without orders from State, Mr. Mann replied: "I will say that in the past this may have been; I do not know. But since I arrived in January 1964, I have had an understanding first with Mr. McCone and now with Admiral Raborn, and I am sure the Department has, even more importantly, that the policy is made here [at State] and that nothing is done without our consent." This "nothing" probably goes too far, since there remain areas of ambassadorial igno- rance. An Ambassador is not always in- formed of "third party" spying in his coun- try?for example, spying in France on the Chinese Communists there. Nor is he given specific details on counterespionage and in- formation gathering about which he may be generally informed. , If the CIA has "bought the madam," as one official put it, of a house of ill fame patronized by influential citizens or officials of a host country, the Ambassador does not know it and probably doesn't want to. MI would, however, have the dubious benefit of any information the madam might disclose. These are the four institutional forms of "control" of the CIA that now exists?save for congressional oversight and the all-im- portant role of the Agency's Director. And the New York Times' survey for these articles left little doubt that the newly vigorous functioning of these four groups has greatly improved coordination, more nearly assured political approval, and sub- General Taylor, former chairman of the Joint intelligence operations that they believe stantially reduced the hazards implicit in Chiefs of Staff and former Ambassador to ? would compromioe.larger policy interests. CIA operations. Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP681300432R000500020016-2 Approved FouReleple_2903/03/25 : CIA-RDP6pB00432R0Q0500020016-2 9122 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE Nevert aeless, the Agency still remains the fount of information on which many policy decisions rest, and the source of facts selected or, otherwise, on which to justify its own projects. Nevertheless, the CIA enjoys an inherent advantage in any conflict with the State or Defense Departments because of its un- deniable expertise?especially in economics and science?and because it Is free from such political entanglements as trying to build up a missile budget (as in the case of the Air l'orce) or of having to justify the recognition of a. foreign leader (as in the case of State). And, nevertheless, in its legitimate need for secrecy, the CIA simply cannot be subjected to as much public or even official scrutiny as all other agencies undergo. A CALL FOR MORE CONTROL For all these reasons and because Of occa- sional blunders, there has been no abatement in the demand of critics for more and stronger centrol. Inevitably, their call is for some form of increased supervision by the people's Representatives in Congress, usually by a joint committee of the two Houses. The Times survey indicated a widespread feeling that such a committee would do the Agency's eital functions more harm than good, and that it would provide little if any solution to the central problem of control. The history of the Central Intelligence Agency since 1947 makes one thing painfully clear?that the control question, while real and of the utmost importance, is one of "not measures but men." The farms of control mean nothing if there' is no will to control, and if there is a will to control, then the form of it is more or less irrelevant. Such a will can only come from the high political officials of the administration, and it can best be inspired in them by the direet example of the President. But even the President probably could not impose his will on the Agency in every case without th: understanding, the concurrence and the vigorous and efficient cooperation of the second most important man in the matter of control?the Director of the CIA. THE CIA: QUALITIES OF DIRECTOR VIEWED AS Cniu.r REIN ON AGENCY (NOTE.-r0110WHIg Is the last of five articles on the Central Intelligence Agency. The ar- ticles are by a team of New York Times correspondents consisting of Tom Wicker, John W. Finney, Max Frankel, E. W. Ken- worthy, and others.) ? WASHINGT ON, April 28.?As copious evi- dence of a Soviet military buildup in Cuba, Ancluding th e installation of antiaircraft mis- siles, poured into Washington in the summer of 1962, the Director of the Central Intelli- gence Agency, John A. McCone, had a strong hunch about its meaning. He believed such an arsenal half-way around the world from Moscow had to be designed ultimately to protect even more important tastallations?longrange offensive missiles and nuclear weapons yet to be pro- vided. Mr. McCone told President Kennedy about his hunch but specified that it was a per- sonal guess entirely lacking in concrete sup- porting evidence. He scrupulously refused to impose his hunch on the contradictory docu- mentary and photoanalysis evidence being provided by the intelligence community over which he presided. He continued to pass to the President and his advisers reports and estimates?based on all available evidence? that the Soviet Union was' not likely to do what he believed in his heart It was doing. When the evidence that the Russians had ably?. But when the President decided on his blockade-and-ultimatum policy, Mr. McCone loyally supported IL and helped carry it out. In 1963, Mr, AtfcCone was personally in fa- vor of the proposed limited nuclear test-ban treaty. He had backed such proposals since his years as chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission in the Eisenhower administra- tion. Nevertheless, because of his desire that the facts should be known as fully as possible, he furnished a CIA staff expert to assist Senator JOHN STENNIS, Democrat, of Mississippi, chairman of an armed services cubcommittee and an opponent of the treaty. This angered the White House and the State Department, but it was consistent with Mr. McCone's view of the CIA's role in informing the Govern- ment as fully as possible. It is in this kind of intellectual effort to separate fact from fancy, evidence from sus- picion, decision from preference, opinion from policy, and consequence from guess that effective control of the CIA must begin, in the opinion of most -of those who have been surveyed by the New York Times. And it is when these qualities have been lacking, the same officials and experts believe, that the CIA most often has become involved.. in those activities that have led to widespread charges that it is not controlled, makes its own policy and undermines that of its politi- cal masters. - Inevitably, the contrast is drawn between John McCone and Allen W. Dulles, one of the most charming and imaginative men in Washington, under whose direction the CIA grew to its present proportions and impor- tance. A GAMBLING MAN Digging a wiretap tunnel from West to East Berlin, flying spy planes beyond the reach of antiaircraft weapons over the Soviet Union, and finding a Laotian ruler in the cafes of Paris were romantie projects that kindled Mr. Dulles' enthusiasm. Sometimes the profits were great; sometimes the losses were greater. To Allen Dunes, a gambling man, the possi- bility of the losses were real but the chance of success was more important. A 20-percent chance to overthrow a leftist regime in Guatemala through a CIA-spon- sored invasion was all he wanted to give It a try. He charmed President Eisenhower with tales of extraordinary snooping on auch rulers as President Carnal Abdel Nasser of the United Arab Republic and with accounts of the romantic derring-do of Kermit Roosevelt in arousing Iranian mobs against Mohammed Mossadegh to restore the Shah to his throne. As long as his brother, John Poster Dulles, was Secretary of State, Allen Dunes had no need to chafe under political "control." The Secretary had an almost equal fascination for devious, back-alley adventure in what he saw as a worldwide crusade. PERSONAL, JUDGMENTS Neither brother earned his high reputation by taut and businesslike administration. Both placed supreme confidence in their per- sonal judgments. Colleagues recall many occasions on which Allen Dulles would cut off debate about, say, the intentions of a foreign head of state with the remark: "Oh, I know him person- ally. He would never do that sort of thing." . Allen Dulles was also an accomplished poli- tician. Throughout his regime he main- tained the best of relations with the late Clarence Cannon of Missouri, who as 'chair- man of the House Appropriations Committee, ' was the key figure in providing CIA funds. Mr. Dulles kept personal control of the selection of other Members of Congress with responsibility for overseeing the CIA, with implanted offensive missiles in Cuba did come the result that he invariably had on his side The intellectual level of meetings among In, Mr. McCone was-among those around the these Members of the congressional estab- intelligence officials at the QIA and other President wh o argue4or m action before the mi protorooteleas leewt-0015T.CiA?-RDP68430041r y ori r because he put difficult and 50011120051b14r Mr. McCone, May 3, 1966 Thus, in the Dulles period at the CIA, there was a peculiar set of circumstances. An ad- venturous Director,' inclined to rely on his own often extremely good and informed in- tuition, widely traveled, read, and experi- enced, with great prestige and the best con- nections in Congress, whose brother held the second highest office in the administration, and whose President completely trusted and relied upon both,-was able to act almost at will and was shilded from any unpleasant consequences. KENNEDY KEPT NEW IN oreofcn When the Eisenhower administration came to an end in 1061, Allen Dulles' reappoint- ment was one of President Kennedy's first acts. Mr. Dulles, like J. Edgar Hoover, who was reappointed head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation at the same time, had great prestige and was- thought to lend continuity and stability to the new administration. In fact, Mr. Dulles' continuance in office set the stage Lfor ?the Bay of Pigs and the great crisis of the CIA. In that incredible drama of 1961, it was Mr. Dulles' weaknesses as CIA Director? rather than, as so often before, his strengths?that came to the fore. He was ' committed to the Cuba invasion plan, at all costs, against whatever objections. The ad- vocate overcame the planner. As President Kennedy and others inter- posed reservations and qualifications, Mr. Dulles and his chief lieutenant, Richard M. Bissell, made whatever changes were required in order to keep the plan alive. For in- stance, they switched the landing site from , the Trinidad area to the Bay of Pigs, to achieve more secrecy, thereby accepting an inferior beachhead site and separating the refugee force of invaders from the Escarn- bray Mountains, where they were supposed to operate as guerrillas, by 80 miles of swami). Above all, lacking his old rapport with President Eisenhower and his brother, lack- ing a coldly objective approach to his plan, Mr. Dulles never realized that President Kennedy suffered from more than tactical reservations. These misgivings?in reality a reluctance to approve the invasion?forced the frequent changes in plans, each weakening the whole, until whatever chance of success there might have been was gone. AT A CR/TICAL HOUR It was John McCone who replaced Allen Dulles at the CIA's most critical hour. After the Bay of Pigs fiasco, it had barely escaped dismemberment or at least the divorce of its Intelligence and Operations Divisions. There were also new cries for greater control, and the men around President Kennedy were suspicious of, if not hostile to, the Agency. Like Mr. Dunes, Mr. McCono devoted much energy to resisting a formal congressional watchdog committee, to courting the senior members of the Armed Services and Appro- priations Committees on Capitol Hill and to converting the members of a resuscitated Presidential advisory board to his view of Intelligence policies. But those who observed him work believe he also brought a keen Intelligence and energy to a tough-minded administration of the Agency itself and to careful, challenging study of its intelligence estimates and recommendations. He broke down the rigid division between operations and analysis that had kept the CIA's analysts?incredible as it seems?ig- norant of the Operations Division's specific plan to invade Cuba. And he began to sub- ject the CIA's own action programs to vigor- ous review and criticism by the Agency's own experts. INCISIVE QUESTIONS Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 May 3, 1966 CONGRESSIOIN AL RECORD --- SENATE cisive questions to those preparing formal analyses ani. plans, forcing them to chal- lenge and defend their own judgments. Above all, he set the hard example himself of putting aside personal preference, in- formed guesses and long gambles in favor of realistic weighing of available evidence and close adherence to administration policy. He brought specialists and experts into conferences and decisionmaking, at a much higher leve: of policy than before. Often he took such men with him to meetings at the Cabinet level. This exposed them to policy considerations as never before, and. put policymakers more closely in touch with the experts on Whose "facts" they were acting. As Chairman of the U.S. Intelligence Board?a group that brings together rep- resentatives from the Defense Intelligence Agency, the State Department's intelligence unit and otaers?Mr. McCone won a reputa- tion for objectivity by frequently overruling the proposals of his own Agency, the CIA. SOME CRITICISM, TOO His regime was not without its critics. Many officiels believe he narrowed the CIA's range of interests, which was as wide as the horizons under the imaginative Allen Dulles. For instance, they say, he was slow to mo- bilize the CIA to obtain information about nuclear pro.erams in India, Israel., and other nations. Mr. McCene also tried, but failed, to end interagency rivalries. Ile spent much time in bitter dispute with Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara about divisions of labor and costs in technological programs and about chains of command in Vietnam. He is reported to have feared the growth of the Defense Intelligence Agency as an invasion of CIA terr tory. With the State Department, too, rivalry continued?.and still does, Much of this can be attributed, on the diplomats' side, to the CIA's readier access to the upper levels of Government and to its financial ability to underwrite the kind of research and field operations that State would like to do for Itself. On the Agency's side, there is undoubtedly some resentment at the State Department's recently increased political control of CIA operations. For instance, until April 28, 1965, the dtay President Johnson ordered the Marines into Santo Domingo, the CIA had reported th e, possibility of a rebellion and it knew of three Communist-controlled groups functioning in the Dominican Republic, but the Agency had not suggested an imminent threat of a Communist takeover. When the President and his 'advisers be- came persuaded that there was such a threat, however, Cl A agents supplied confirming in- telligence?some of it open to challenge by an alert reader. CIA officials seem a little red faced about this compliance, and the in- timation is that the CIA may have gone over- board in tying not to undermine but to substantiate a political policy decision, WITI:IN THE BOUNDS OF POLICY Mr. McCone's pride and the fierce loyalty to the Agency that he developed made him resentful 0 congressional and public criti- cism, not always to his own advantage. Nevertheless, as a result of his single-minded efforts to control himself and his Agency, other form er members of the Kennedy ad- ministration?many of whom opposed his appointment?now find it hard to recall any time when Ar. McCone or the CIA in his time overstepped the bounds of policy deliber- ately. Thus, they are inclined to cite him as proof of the theo:y that in the process of Govern- ment men are more important than mechan- ics?and in support of the widespread opinion among, present and former officials that the pr eblern of controlling the CIA must begin with men I The far more general belief is that Con- gress ought to have a much larger voice in the control of the Agency. This belief is reinforced by the fact that the congressional control that now exists is ill-informed, in the hands of a chosen few, subject to what the Agency wishes to tell even these few, and occasionally apathetic. There .e four subcommittees of the sen- ate and House Armed Services and Appro- priations Committees to which the Director reports. Mr. McCone met about once a month with the subcommittees. The present Director, Adm. William F. Raborn, meets with them somewhat more often. CONFLICHNG VIEWS There are conflicting opinions on the val- ue of these sessions. Some who participate say that they are "comprehensive," that the Director holds back nothing in response to questions, that he goes into "great detail on budget and operations" and is "brutally frank." Others say that "we are pretty well filled in" but that the subcommittees get no precise information on the budget or the number of employees and that the Director reveals only as much as he wants to. These conflicting views probably reflect the composition and interests of the sub- committees. Those on the Senate side are said to be "lackadaisical" and "apathet- ic," with some Senators not wanting to know too much. The House subcommittees are said to be "alert,- interested and efficient," with members insisting on answers to ques- tions. Representative GEORGE H. MAHON, Demo- crat, of Texas, chairman of the House Ap- propriations Comimttee, has warned the ad- ministration It must itself police the CIA budget more stringently than that of any other agency because he and other Congress- men believe they should protect the sensi- tive CIA budget, as it comes to them, from the congressional economy bloc and the Agency's more determined critics. As a result of this and other congressional representations, the CIA "slush fund" for emergencies has been reduced below $100 million. And?much to Mr. McCone's an- noyance?President Johnson's economy drives resulted in an administration reduc- tion in the Agency's budget. Three things, however, are clear about this congressional oversight. NO REAL CONTROL One is that the subcommittee members exercise no real control because they . are not informed of all covert operations, either before or after they take place. The second point regarding congressional oversight is that a handful of men like Sen- ators CANNON and. Russacal, with their great prestige, do not so much control the CIA as shield it from its critics. Finally, even these establishment watch- dogs can be told just as much as the CIA Director thinks they should know. In fact, one or two of the subcommittee members are known to shy away from too much secret in- formation, on the ground that they do not want either to know about "black" opera- tions or take the chance of unwittingly dis- closing them. For all these reasons, there is a large body of substantial opinion?in and out of Con- gress?that favors more specific monitoring of intelligence activity. ? The critics insist that Congress hes a duty periodically to investigate the activities of the CIA and other intelligence arms; to check on the CIA's relations with other executive departments, study its budget and exercise greater and more intelligent oversight than the present diffused subcommittees, which operate without staff and with little or no representation from members most eon- 9123 A FOUNTAIN OF LEAKS But the overwhelming consensus of those most knowledgeable about the CIA, now and in the past, does not support the idea that Congress should "control" the CIA. A num- ber of reasons are adduced: Security. Congests is the well-known fountain of more leaks than any other body in Washington. The political aspirations of and pressures on Meinbers make them eager to appear in print; they do not have the executive responsibility weighing on them, and many CIA operations could provide dramatic passages in campaign speeches. Politics. Any standing committee would have to be bipartisan. This would give minority party members?as well as dis- sidents in the majority?unparalleled oppor- tunities to learn the secrets of the executive branch and of foreign policy, and to make political capital of mistakes or controversial policies. Republicans, for instance, armed with all the facts and testimony that investi- gation could have disclosed, might well have wrecked the Kennedy administration after the Bay of Pigs. The Constitution, The CIA acts at the di- rection of the President and the National Security Council. If a congressional com- mittee had to be informed in advance of CIA activities, covert and overt, there might well be a direct congressional breach of the constitutional freedom of the executive branch and of the President's right to con- duct foreign policy. Control. If a carefully chosen committee conscientiously tried to avoid all these dangers, it could probably exercise little real "control" of the kind critics desire. At best, for instance, it could probably do little more than investigate some questionable opera- tions in secrecy and after they had taken place, and then report privately to the Presi- dent, who might or might not respond. Ideology. Congress is full of "professional anti-Communists" and hes not a few "pro- fessional liberals." In its worldwide .activi- ties, the CIA regularly takes covert actions that would - profoundly offend either or both?for instance, supporting some non- Communist leftist against a military regime, or vice versa. To report this kind of activity to Congress would be certain to set off public debate and recriminations and lay a whole new set of domestic political pressures on the agency. Policy. Knowledgeable men in Washing- ton do not accept the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy as a desirable model for over- sight of the CIA. They point out that the Atomic Energy Committee has developed its own staff of experts in its field, in some cases abler men than those in the Atomic Energy Commission, and these congressional experts now have a vested interest in their own ideas of atomic policy and 'projects. AN EMPIRE FORESEEN This, these sources fear, would be the out- come of a joint committee on intelligence? a new intelligence empire on Capitol Hill that could in time exert a direct policy in- fluence on the CIA, separate from and chal- lenging the President's policy decisions. This would diffuse rather than focus power over the Agency and confuse rather than clarify the problem of control, Other recommendations for a congres- sional intervention have been advanced. The most drastic?and in some ways the mcist interesting?would be to legislate the separation of the CIA's intelligence and analysis function from the operations or "dirty tricks" function. President Kennedy, after the Bay of Pigs, rejected a proposal to create a new and au- tonomous intelligence and analysis agency. ? This plan would have covert political opera- tions under a small and largely anonymous A101313646dIf (Strike leaUldidgMtlatIA-RDP68B004Y2Mido?566Nbef4ent. Approved FoLRelease 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68B00432M20500020016-2 ? - 9124 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE - EFFICIENCY DROP FEARED If accepted, this plan would have had the great advantage, in terms of control, of di- vorcing "lack" operators and their schemes from the source of information on which the decision to act must be made. Thus, the cover; operators would have no more in- formatior. than anyone else in government, no power to shape, color, withhold, or man- ufacture information, and could, in effect, do only what they were told to do by politi- cal authorities. It would also reduce the sheer size and power of the CIA within the Government, much of 'which is based on its combination of functions?providing information, pro- posing action, and having the ability to carry it out. On the other hand, as Mr. Kennedy con- cluded, st ch a divorce might well lower the total over; and covert efficiency of the intel- ligence eff ort. Those who favor the present combined agency insist that intelligence and action officers must be close enough to ad- vise one another?with analysts checking operators, but also profiting from the opera- tors' experiences in the field. Moreover, they point out that so-called paramilitery operations are ? more easily transferre 1 on paper than in fact to the De- fense Depirtment. They note that the De- partment, for instance, can by law, ship arms only to resognized governments that under- take certain obligations in return, and can- not legally arm or assist, say, rebel groups or mercenaries, even for laudable purposes. Nor could the Defense Department easily acquire the skill, the convenient "covers," the political talents, and bureaucratic flexi- bility required for quick, improvised action in time al crisis. As evide ace of that, there is the case of the successful political and military organi- za,tion of .sill tribesmen in Vietnam carried out by the CIA some years ago. When the Army wor. control of the operation in a bureaucratic infight, the good beginning was lost in a classic bit of military mismanage- ment and the tribal project Collapsed. As for the State Department's taking over covert operations, the opponents ask how could the Department survive the inevitable exposure of some bit of political skulduggery in scene oeher country, when it is supposed to be the simon-pure vessel of the United States proper' diplomatic relations? A LESS DRASTIC PLAN A far lets drastic but perhaps more feasi- ble approach would be to add knowledge- able congressional expert'S in foreign affairs to the military and appropriations subcom- mittees that now check on the CIA. Along tleis line is the idea backed by Sen- ator MCCARTHY?that a subcommittee of the Senal e Foreign Relations Committee should be added to the existing watchdogs. Such men-as '3. W. PULDRIGHT, Democrat, of Arkansas, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, M/HE MANSFIELD Of Montana, ;he Senate Democratic leader, and GEORGE D. ASHEN Of Vermont, a Republican member a! the Foreign Relations Commit- tee, might bring greater balance and sensi- ' tivity to the present group of watchdog sub- committee a Most of those interviewed in the New York -Times survey for these articles also believed that the CIA should have no influence on the selection cl members of the subcommittees. While the excuse for giving the Agency a voice is to make sure that only "secure" and "responsible" Members of Congress are chosen, the net effect is that the Agency usu- ally manaees to have itself checked by, its best friends in Congress and by those who can best shield it from more critical Mem- bers like Senator MCCARTHY and Senator MANSFIELD. FUND snasn PROPOSED Finally, many filoppraovecisfe Mae lea might be useful for benie select nonpermae nent committee of independent-minded Members of Congress to make a thorough, responsible study of the whole intelligence community. Such a group might set out to determine how much of the community's activity is actually needed or useful, and how much of the whole apparatus might be reduced in size and expense?and thus in the kind of visibility that brings the CIA into disrepute overseas and at home. One former official said quite seriously that he was not sure how much the Nation would lose in vital services if all the activities of the CIA apart from those dealing with tech- nological espionage?satellites and the like? had their budgets arbitrarily reduced by half. A number of others suggested that it was possible for a great many of the CIA's infor- mation-gathering functions and study proj- ects to be handled openly by the State De- partment, if only Congress would appropri- ate the money for it. But the State Department is traditionally starved for funds by Members of Congress who scoff at the "cookie pushers" and the "striped-pants boys." The seine Members are often quite willing to appropriate big sums, almost blindly, for the secret, "tough" and occasionally glamorous activities of the spies, saboteurs, and mysterious experts of the CIA. As another example of what a specially organized, responsible congressional inveati- gation might discover, some officials ex- pressed their doubts about the National Security Agency. This Defense Department arm specializes in -making and breaking codes, spends about $1 billion a year?twice as much as the CIA?and, in the opinion of many who know its work, hardly earns its keep. But to most of those interviewed, the question of control ultimately came down to the caliber and attitude of the men who run the CIA, and particularly its director. The present director, Admiral Reborn, is a man who earned a high reputation as the developer of the Navy's Polaris missile but who had no previous experience in intelli- gence work. Nor is he particularly close to President Johnson or to other high admin- istration officials. , INAUSPICIOUS START The admiral took office on a bad day?the one on which Mr. Johnson dispatched the Marines to Santo Domingo last April. Admiral Raborn and his predecessor, Mr. McCone, lunched together in downtown Washington that afternoon, unaware of the imminent intervention. As they parted, Admiral Reborn offered Mr. McCone a ride to the Langley, Va., headquarters of the CIA. But Mr. McCone said he was going home to pack his clothes. Those who know of this exchange have a hunch that if Mr. McCone had accepted the invitation and returned to the turmoil that quickly developed in his old office, the his- tory of the intervention might have been different. Many are inclined to blame Ad- miral Raborn, in any event, for the mish- mash of hasty evidence the CIA contrived. to justify the State Department's claim that there was a threat of a Communist uprising. One reason the admiral was chosen, after President Johnson had searched for 6 months for a successor to Mr. McCone, was that as head of the Polaris project he had shown great ability to work with and mollify inquisitive Congressmen. Another was that his military background made him an unlikely target for charges of being too "soft" or to liberal for his post. The same consideration influenced President Kennedy in choosing the conservative Re- publican John McCone, and it is notable that no leading figure of the Democratic Party, much lees one of its liberals, has ever May 3, 1936 that Admiral Raborn was chosen primarily as a "front man." Ironically, the Congress that he was supposed to impress is actually concerned?interviews disclosed?because ho has not seemed to have the sure grasp of the Agency's needs and activities that would most inspire confidence in It. RADORN DEFENDED Knowledgeable sources say the CIA itself, In its day-to-day business, is a bureaucracy, like any other, functioning routinely what- ever the quality of its leadership. These sources argue that the experience and pro- fessiona?lism of its staff are so great that any lack of these qualities in Admiral Raborn is scarcely felt. But they do not agree that "Red" Raborn is Just a front man. He is different?as would be expected?from any Director who pre- ceded him, but there is evidence available to suggest that he may not be such an un- fortunate choice as has been suggested in. a number of critical articles in the press. The admiral is said to have President Johnson's confidence, although in a different way from the confidence President Kennedy placed in Mr. McCone. The latter was a valued member of the group that argued out high policy and influenced the President's decisions, not with facts but also with opin- ions and recommendations. Admiral Reborn is said to to make little effort to exert such an influence on policy. Partly, this is because Mr. Johnson appar- ently does not want the CIA Director in such a role?and among those interviewed by the New York Times there was a belief that one reason John McCone left the post was that he could not play as influential a role as he had in the Kennedy administration. The main reason for the admiral's ap- proach, however, is his Navy background. He regards himself as having more of a service and staff mission than a policymaking jab. He believes it is his duty to lay the best available facts before the President and thoso other high officials who make or in- fluence policy, so that their judgments may be as informed as possible. To enter into policy discussions as an advocate, in his view, would inevitably compromise his role as an impartial and objective source of infor- mation. Among knowledgeable officials, moreover, Admiral Reborn is credited with at least two administrative developments within the Agency?both stemming, again, from his Navy background. LONG-RANGE PLANNING He has installed an operations center: not unlike a military command post or a Navy ship's "combat information center." In it, round-the-clock duty officers constantly monitor communications of every sort. They can instantly communicate with the White House, State Department, Pentagon, and agents in the field, by means of the Agency's wizardry with machines and electronics. This represents primarily a drawing to- gether and streamlining of capabilities the Agency already had, but it is rated as a posi- tive advance in CIA efficiency. The other Reborn innovation is a Navy- like system of long-range management plan- ning. He has asslgned a group of officials to "look ahead" for decades at the shape of the world to come, Out of this continuing study, the admiral hopes to be able to make more precise plans for the Agency's needs in manpower, money, equipment, and organization in, say, 1975, so that it can be planned for right now. There persists among many interested in the CIA, however, a reluctance to accept the Idea that the Agency should be headed by anyone other than axi experienced, strong executive with a wide grasp of international been the Agency's Director, affairs and intelligence work, strong ties to SeeZ Beltiedidds,k.Qk oclielitipagegai4iggismikoduil knowledge and /1i.,, "(1%14.1;1 Agency's work believed among present and former officials within the limits of policy and propriety. Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2 May 3, 1966 ? This conomi has been heightened by the departure from the White House of McGeorge Bundy, now president of the Ford Founda- tion. As Mr, Johnson's representative on the 54-12 group, he was probably second only to the director of the CIA in maintaining "control" and took an intense interest in this du . Thus, if the White House replacements, Bill D. Moy ars and Walt W. Rostow, prove either less interested or less forceful in rep- resenting tr. e White House interest in CIA operations, and if Admiral Raborn's alleged lack of experience in intelligence and for- eign affairs handicaps him, effective control of the Agency could be weakened without any change at all in the official processes of control. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 9125' PROMOTION DEBATE Some people concluded even before the end of the admiral's first year that the diffi- culties of finding a succession of suitable CIA directoz s made it advisable to promote Impressive professionals from within the Agency. The most widely respected of these is the Deputy Dir c ?tor, Richard Reline, who was said to have been Mr. McCone's choice to suc- ceed him. Others arEue, however, that intelligence is too dangerous a thing to be left to profes- sional spies end that a loyal associate of the President's with the political qualifications for a seinen Cabinet position should hold the post. Whatever his identity, however, the prime conclusion of the New York Times survey of the Central Intelligence Agency is that its Director is or should be the central figure in establishing and maintaining the actual sub- stance of control, whatever its forms may take. For if the Director insists, and bends all his efforts to make sure, that the Agency serve the political administration of the Gov- ernment, on.y blind chance or ineptitude in the field is likely to take the CIA out of politiofil consral, CC ,NCLUSIONS 05 STUDY A number of other conclusions also emerge from the study: Whatever may have been the situation in the past, and whatever misgivings are felt about Admisal Reborn, there is now little concern in the Johnson administration or among farmer high officials, and there is even less evidence, that the CIA is making or sabo- taging foreien policy or otherwise acting on Its own. When CIA operations acquire a life of their own and oul run approved policy, they often follow a pat ;ern well known also in less se- cret arms 01 Government. Diplomats fre- quently say more than they are told to say to other governments or otherwise exceed their instructions. Foreign aid and propaganda operations, though "public," can commit the United Statcs to practices and men in ways not envision ffi by Washington. Military op- erations can escalate by their own logic, and when things go wrong the Pentagon has at times been more reluctant than the CIA in producing the facts. Nonethele:s, while the CIA acts as the Government's fountain of information as well as its "black" operating arm, while it is the CIA that bath proposes operations and sup- plies the facts to justify them, the danger of Its getting out of control of the administra- tion exists end ought to be taken seriously within and without the Government. The Bay of Pigs stands as enduring testimony to that fact. The task of coping with this danger is es- sentially thct of the President, his highest officials, and the Director of the CIA. It can only be met peripherally by congressional oversight, and then with increased danger of security 1,x-iks and domestic political pres- sures on the Agency. The charges against the CIA at home and abroad are so widespread, and in many ways, so exaggerated that the effectiveness and morale of the Agency may be seriously im- paired. In particular, there could ultimately be a problem in recruiting and keeping the high caliber of personnel upon whom the Agency must rely both for doing useful work and for keeping that work within proper bounds_ CRUCIAL QUESTIONS ? Thus, there must be in this and in any administration a tight, relentless, searching review and analysis of the CIA and, its ac- tivities, meeting squarely and answering honestly at least these questions; Is any proposed operation or activity likely, on balance, to make a genuine and necessary contribution, in the long view as well as the short,' to legitimate American interests and aspirations in the world, or is it merely convenient, expedient, and possible without regard to its wider implications or to the real necessity for it? In suns, is the Government of a proud and honorable people relying too much on "black" operations, "dirty tricks," harsh and illicit acts in the "back alleys" of the world? Is there some point at which meet- ing fire with fire, force with force, subversion with subversion, crime with crime, becomes so prevalent and accepted that there no longer remains any distinction of honor and pride between grim and implacable adver- smaes? These questions are a proper and neces- sary concern for the people of the United States. They are a proper and necessary con- cern for Congress. But in the nature of the case, neither the people nor Congress can easily learn the answers, much less insure that the answers are always the right ones. . THE PRESIDENT'S TASK That can only be done within the execu- tive branch, by the highest authorities of the Government, Controlling the CIA is a job that rests squarely upon the President of the United States, the Director of the Agency, and the officials appointed by the President to check its work. And if these men are to insist that they do control the Agency, then they are the ones who must be blamed if control fails, "Those who believe that the U.S. Government an occasion resorts to force when it shouldn't," Richard Bissell, the CIA's former Deputy Director, once said, "should in all fairness and justice direct their views to the question of national policy and not hide behind the criticism that whereas the President and Cabinet generally are enlight- ened people, there is an evil and ill-con- trolled agency which imports this sinister element," The New York Times study of the CIA sug- gests that it is not an invisible government but the real government of the United States upon which the responsibility must lie- whenever the Agency may be found "out of control." For if that responsibility is accepted, there can be no invisible govern- AN ENDURING SOCIETY Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, on the evening of May 1, 1966, the American Good Government Society held its an- nual meeting in which it memorialized the enduring contributions made by George Washington to America, On that occasion, Archie K. Davis, of Winston-Salem, N.C., delivered the principal address which-he entitled "An Enduring Society." Mr. Davis, who is currently serving as president of the American Bankers As- sociation, has made contributions of the utmost significance to his community, his State, and his Nation in the fields of banking, education, industry, good gov- ernment, and religion. He is one of the Nation's most profound historians and eloquent orators. In his address before the Good Gov- ernment Society, Mr. Davis portrayed the purposes which prompted the Founding Fathers to make the America we love, and the conditions which must be met if America is to endure as a gov- ernment of laws dedicated to the freedom of the individual. His address merits the consideration of all thoughtful Americans, and for this reason ought to be as widely dissemi- nated as possible. On behalf of my col- league [Mr. JORDAN] and myself, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this address be printed at this point in the body of the RECORD. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: AN ENDURING Soeforz In addressing this distinguished audience, I am not unmindful of the signal honor ac- corded me; for, in paying tribute to two such distinguished public servants, the Honorable SAM J. ERVIN, senior U.S. Senator from North Carolina, and the Honorable GERALD FORD Of Michigan, House minority leader, we are privileged to do so in the name of George Washington, the first and greatest of all Americans, Even if the ingredients of history were not present, I would be tempted to provide them gratuitously. But, recognizing that the im- mortal name of Washington is forever linked with that of the Commonwealth of Virginia, I really have no choice but to anchor my text in history. As a provincial patriot none Was the equal of Washington, although he was as national in stature and outlook as he was provincial. A grateful nation and a prideful Commonwealth justifiably claim him with equal felicity. We in North Caro- lina take pardonable pride in proximity to such historic eminence. As a North Carolinian, however, I share with all other North Carolinians the knowl- edge that we have been nurtured in the spirit of true humility. We have long since given up any hope of ever establishing historic primacy over Virginia. Having suffered "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" lo' these many years, we have been forced to cultivate an attitude of expectancy for the future and one of resignation for the past. It is true,- of course, that the first English settlement in America was on North Caro- lina soil, in the years 1585-87, but we now know that the first permanent English set- tlement in America was begun on April 26, 1607, at Jamestown, Va. To our persistent claim that the first white child was born in North Carolina, we are always asked, "Why, then, did you name her Virginia Dare?" Beginning in the early 1750's, and during the many years of' westward expansion there- after, we in North Carolina have always prided ourselves upon the daring exploits of Daniel Boone in opening up the Kentucky territory. Nor have we overlooked our claim to the remarkable Christopher Gist who served as companion and guide to young George Waehington in the early exploration of the Ohio territory. He, like Boone, once lived in the -upper Yadkin River section of North Carolina. But there, unhappily, our Approved For Release 2003/03/25 : CIA-RDP68600432R000500020016-2