NIXON QUESTIONS ATOMIC STRATEGY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP72-00337R000500260001-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 9, 2005
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: October 19, 1970
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved For Release 2005/11/21: CIA-RDP72-00337R000500260~CS~1k5
A
' '
i~lL~r 1o i_ ~ 1. .iVVES
NIXON JUESIIO
AT IIO STRtTEQY
Top Aides Soo Soviet Gains
Peril Dctorrencc Stance
''y WILLIAM EEEC
Special to The New York Times
WASHINGTON, Oct. 19-The
basic strategy by which the
United States has long hoped
to deter nuclear war is being
questioned by President Nixon
and some of his top national-
security advisers.
Senior officials 'say privately
that, unless the Soviet build-up
of strategic missiles and sub-
marines can be halted soon in
fan arms-control agreement, the
`Russians could be in a position
to wipe out, in a first strike,
two of the three pillars of the
United States-nuclear deterrent
j-Minuteman missiles and B-52
bombers.
Such capability, these offi-
cials hold, could undermine the
philosophy of deterrence that
the United States has followed
during much of the nuclear age.
if the situation is allowed to
develop, analysts say, the So-
viet Union might expect the
United States to adjust to the
new balance of power and, for
example, back off from some
future middle East confronta.
tion as the Russians did in the
1962 confrontation over their
missiles in Cuba.
For years American strate-
gists have relied on the ability
to ride out a surprise attack
and retaliate overwhelmingly
against Soviet cities. Their
premise was that as long as
the Russians were convinced of
the American capability of "as-
sured destruction," it did not
really matter how many nu-
clear weapons they built or
what kind since they would be
deterred from initiating a nu-
clear strike.
A series of comprehensiveI
un-
studies has of a heedoc
derlying premise
trine.
A senior administration ana-
lyst said, "If current Soviet
weapons trends continue, this
will threaten to turn our as-
sured-destruction doctrine on
its bead. it may not be able to
deter for very much longer."
This then lies behind some of
the growing impatience and
skepticism that officials are ex-
pressing over the .slowness of
the United States Soviet talks
/I1/''
r 1~.'t,~r Consistent optimism, irr~
i1rC .and private expressions,
einc , Ci., Aart of talks in ael-
t.i71;1 Mast November, many of
aicia1 are becoming pessimistic.'
na-ay Cluc Awaited
,y tiLa `House official sug
atw^ that unless the Russians,
con.a tj ,.pith compromise .pro-
po5ai0 within two or three!
wecln after the talks resume
ne" ,nonth, the United States
niay, regard a meaningful
. set-
tlemC,t as rather elusive.
Last November, when the
~
talkks started on a hopeful note,
tho Russians were estimated
to have 1,350 land-based inter-
continental ballistic missiles
(ICBM's), in operation or under
construction, and about 200
missiles aboard aubmarines.
Now the estimates have
jumped to 1,500 ICBM's and
450 missiles on nuclear subma-
rines, either operational or un-
der construction. In addition,
100 o so missiles are believed
ted on older submarines.
Imoun
mparison, the United
By co
States has Jong maintained
1,000 Minuteman and 54Titan-2
IC1M's, plus 656 Polaris mis-
siles on submarines.
The strategists worry .less'
about numerical comparisons)
than about the character and
possible use of the weapons.
The American analysts have
calculated that some 420 giant
Soviet SS-9 missiles, carrying
three five-megaton warheads
each, could destroy 95 per cent
of the Minutemen. The Russians
have more than 300 SS-9's and
are continuing to build.
The Russians have recently
started testing a three-part
warhead for the smaller SS-11
missile, of which there are more
than 800 in the Soviet arsenal.
The Russians have also been
gradually expanding the num.
her of missile submarines on
station off the East Coast and
the officials expect them to de-
ploy some off the West Coast
fairly soon.
The American analysts also
note that missiles fired from
submarines offshore would pro-
vide only a few minutes warn-
ing time, threatening to catch
t-52 bombers on the ground
and to destroy key command
centers, radar stations and
communications clinks.
The concern then is that if
the Russians could threaten a
successful first strike against
land-based weapons, the Presi-
dent would be faced with de-
ciding whether to fire surviving
Polaris missiles against Soviet
cities, knowing the Russians
could then wipe out American
cities.
President Nixon expressed
this worry in a paragraph
buried in his 160-page State
of the World message last Feb-
ruary
"Should a President, in the
event of a nuclear attack, he
'left with the single option of
ordering the mass des ruction
of enemy civilians, in the face
of certainty that it wouid be
followed by the mass slaughter
of Americans?"
No senior America,
gist suggests that the
having achieved such a c , nil'
ity., would press the
Rather they wo, ry
Russians might feel e:.,lx,lcir?u:
to pursue a more
foreign policy, convinced ci
the United State:: would
to t;,e new reality of the cu-
clear balance.
buiid?up.
 25X1 Approved For Release 2005/11/21 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000500260001-5
Next 3 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2005/11/21 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000500260001-5
 j.".,_ Approved For Release 2~~71f1~" ~1-F~~p72=003~a~000026~b01-5
Washington, September 28,1970
OPERATION ALERT
1. Purpose
The United States has become the Number 2
power in strategic military strength. We are no
longer first, but a fast-slab second behind the
In addition to warning Americans that the
U.S. is dangerously far behind the Soviet Union
in strategic military power, the purposes of
Operation Alert are to:
-Inform Congress and the Administration
that the ASC's National Security Issues Poll
shows that the bulk of the American people
want their country to be Number 1.
-Urge all voters to make national security the
pr iorit~~ issue in the November elections by
studying the candidates' positions on this vital
subject before they cast their ballots.
-Provide President Nixon with positive, tangi-
ble evidence that most voters want "Peace
Through Strength" and will back him against the
"disarmament lobby" in Congress in regaining
militaryjuperiority over the Soviet Union.
soviet Union.
This is the blunt warning now being mailed
out to more than two million American voters,
both Democrats and Republicans, and to some
3,000 civic organizations throughout the
country by the American Security Council in
the opening phase of its Operation Alert, a
massive, nation-wide voter education program.
The Operation Alert report, released to the
press on September 23rd, features the results of
-three newly completed ASC projects:
(1) An up-date of the Council's 1969 analysis
of the strategic military balance. This shows a
current missile megatonnage preponderance of 6
.to 1 in favor of the U.S.S.R.
(2) The findings of a nation-wide public
opinion survey involving some 115,600 partici-
pants. This clearly indicates that the great
majority of Americans want the security of
strategic superiority.
(3) The National Security Index ratings for
every member of the present Congress. This
takes into account the actual voting record of
each member on ten key national security bills
or amendments which came to a roll call vote in
1969 and 1970.Approved For Release 2005/11/21
H. The Strategy c Military Balance
The Operation Alert report summarizes
today's critical imbalance in strategic missile
megatonnage in the following chart. These fig-
ures reinforce the grim assessment made by
Secretary of Defense Laird in his speech to the
Associated Press Annual Luncheon on April 20,
1970:
"Thus, in the space of five years-from
1965 to 1970... the Soviet Union has
virtually quadrupled the total megatonnagc
in its strategic. offensive force ... In that
same period the United- States ...reduced
t?/
 It also unc.crlincs ep~6$t11d4For'IItFeacsdo 1/21 : CI WL1Pe12/ 3 ' 0~6 '(~0'6t0 '11s5 race; the
P tion made by the louse Armed services om - AS- oviets have Celt runnccc of ware at full
mittee in their Military Procurement Authoriza- speed all by themselves.
tion Report of April 24, 1970:
STRATEGIC MILITARY BALANCE _ U.S.S.R. VS. U.S.A.
September 1970
Orbital Bombardment System
Fractional OBS
and
U.S.S.R.
U.S.A.
Delivery Vehicles
Megatonnage
Delivery
Megatonnage
Delivery System
(approx.)-
Vehicles
(approx.)
Early Model ICBM
220 SS-6s, SS-7s, SS-8s
1,100
54 Titans
270
Small ICBMs
800 SS-11s, SS-13s
800
1,000 Minutemen
1,000
Large ICBMs
300 SS-9s
7,500
0
0
Developed, probably opera-
30.100 each '
0
0
tional, number unknown
Sub Launched Ballistic
280 SSN-6s, Serbs and Sarks
200
656 Polaris
460
Missiles
Sub Launched Cruise
300 Shaddocks
30
0
0
Miss~:es
Intermeuiate and ?.tedium
700 SS-4s, SS-5s, and SS-14s
700
0
0
Range Ballistic Missiles
Heavy Bombers
200 Bisons and Bears
Variable
550 B 52s
Variable
Medium Bombers
700 Badgers and Blinders
Variable
0
0
Totals*
3,500
10,330
2,260
1,730
*(Mega tonnage totals do not include Heavy or Medium Bomber payloads or Orbital Bombardment System Warheads.)
The Operation Alert report emphasizes that III. The National Security Issues Poll
bad as this imbalance is, the actual situation is
even ~,orse. This is because the data used in the
ASC's analysis are peacetime figures. Since U.S.
policy clearly rejects the concept of a "first
strike" on our part the more realistic measure of
our true strategic power would be that which
might be remaining after a Soviet first strike.
Based on what is known about current Soviet
uclrir missile inventories and production rates,
n
The American Security Council believes that
in a true democracy, decisions on such vital
matters as military preparedness should reflect
the will of the people. Today the key question-
which in the final analysis must be answered at
the ballot box-is, "Does the trend toward
unilateral disarmament represent the will of
most Americans or the will of special interest
the U.S. would be fortunate to have from 20% pressure groups?"
to 50;0 of its s Wg4i qE RgJq@sIgf?,,QS7 /r1au21 : CIA ROP1720a'3r37ROOM0026dDOl lcstion, the
tional after a Russian surprise attack. -/ASC conducted a National Security Issues Poll
 To CIO this, tjgrp ,ded)FWF lugs 06911 11/21 : C1p rPQR7?aQQ 3,~,r tQUA~S~ }Q~Q1i is:ri is tlr tt
,Security Index. us Compares the actual voting the coming November rlccticns could be ciceis-
record of each Senator and CongTTcssman on ten -ire in determining the future of U.S. security. If
key national security bills or amendments with more effort is not devoted to corrccing the
the Natio
l V
t
Ad
i
B
'
na
o
er
v
sory
oard
s positions
on these ten legislative actions as determined by
the National Security Issues Poll.
Twenty-eight Senators arc listed in the Opera-
tion Alert report as receiving a National Security
Index of 100%. Of these, scvcn are up for
re-election: Dodd, Fannin, Fong, I-Iruska,
Murphy, Scott and Stennis.
present strategic military
never be able to overcome
become Number 1 again.
inmbala)nce, \%C may
the Soviet's lead and
Operation :alert seeks to present the facts: it
is up to you, the voter, to decide whether or not
you want to pass on to your children the
security of military superiority and the confi-
dence that comes from Peace Through Strength.
Eighteen Senators received a zero ra o,
including the following six who are running for
re-election: Goodell, Hart, Kennedy, Proxmire, JOIN M. I?TSIIEI.,
.~ y
Tydings s and Williams (NJ.).
It is of interest that 45% of the U.S. Senators up for re-election scored 33 or less.
In many cases the voter has a clear choice on national security issues. For example in these U.S.
Senate races:
State Candidates and their National Security lildex
California Murphy (R) 100% Tunney (D) 0%
Indiana Roudebush (1:) 100 a Hartke (D) 10%
Maryland Beall (R) 100% Tydings (D) 0%
North Dakota Klcppe (R) 100% Burdick (D) ? 30%
Tennessee Brock (R) 100% Gore (D) 33%
Copies of the full Operation Alert report are available at 10 for $1.00 from either address below.
:. w~^~' '^...;.,--S,::S~,:gT..~ ~-~-5~ .?e??+L=...:~^;=~.uf:{-~ Ya.:TG>:.ZZi3&'3g:.T:7d?~s:E^~..~:d2~'^73".r'~';^..,~-L"i2: v_'T-4~i~e--^`~?-,.'~S~.S~.4~'~e~?Z9F:~r~;7~^-..n.' :^:3..:.. "~~'Z?.
EDITORIAL BOARD
John M. Fisher .................................. Editor and Publisher Dr. ;'!iliiam K. Lambie, Jr. Associate Editor, Administrative Director
Dr. James D. Atkinson ...................... . . International Politics Editor Edgar Anse! "+owrer News Editor
............................. . . . . .
Dr. Lev E. Dcbriansky ............................... Economics Editor Lee R. Pennington .............................. Internal Sccurit F'itnr
William Gi!l ..................................... Contributing Editor Dr. Herminio Portoll-Vila Latin Amsriran F. :sar
g y
Anthony Harrigan ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. National Editor Dr. St2!3n T. Pr, nr ...... . . . . . .. . ? ? ? ? ? , Straw and CiilitarrAffairs Editor
.
William H. Hecht State Councils Editor Prof. Raymerd S. S!e_oer .................. Associate Editor, Techrar;?; Edi;cr
Frank J. Johnsen ..................................... Foreign Editor ? Dr. Stephen L. Sp2rcaa .......................... Middle Eastern Editor
Or. Walter-H. Judd ...... ........... Radio Editor R. Adm. Chas:er't":erd,-USN (Pet.) ...................... La?;r ~. Space Editor
NATIONAL STRATEGY COMMITTEE
Robert W. Galvin, Chairman
Co-Chairmen
Admiral H. 0. Felt, USN (Rat.)
Dr. Willard F. Libby
General Bernard A. Schriever, USAF (Rot.)
Dr. William J. Thaler
General Nathan F. Twining, USAF (Ret.)
Loyd Wright
General Paul D. Adams, USA (Ret.)
Dr. Harold M. Agnew
Lieutenant Genaral Ed.vard M. Almond, USA (Pet.)
Bennett Archambault
Dr. James 0. Ati-irson
G. Duncan Ba::man
Charles S. Cra ,mile
Admiral Robert L. D.nnison, USN (Rat.)
Henry Duque Admiral Ben hloreell, USN (Ret.)
Honorable Elbridgo Durbrow Dr. Robert Morris
Patrick J. FrarAey, Jr. Dr. Nicholls Nyaradi
Fred M. Gilles Dr. Stefan T. Po'sony
Vice Admiral Eltcn `?'otters Grenfe,l, USN (Rat.) General Th.em>_s S. Pcv.er, USAF (Ret.)
General Paul 0. Harkins, USA (Pet.) Brig. Gen. Robert C. Richardson, USAF (Pet.)
Anthony Harrigan Ira G. Ross
Clifford F. Hood Vice Admiral W. A. Schoech, USN (Rot.)
Dr. Montgomery H. Johnson ? Prof. Raymond S. S!c-^e
James S. Ker;m,per, Jr. Major Gene-31 Dale 0. Smith, USAF (Rel.)
William H. Kendall Admiral Feiir B. Stump, US'': (Rel.)
Honorah!a t,";i!liam F. Knowland Or. A. B. Suttle
Vice Admiral Fitzhugh Lee, US:`1 (Rat.) Dr. Edgard Te'ler
Genera( Curtis E. Le'tay, USAF (Pet.) Hear Admiral Chcster'V,ard. US;J (Rel.)
Vice Admiral R. E. Libby, USU (Rat.) Dr. Keri,,rth';;a'son
Honorable Clare Booth Luce General Albert C. V/2 U-A (P t )
A. B. V:Kce, Jr. Major Genaral W. A.'.,cr ,r,. US .!C (Rot.)
The American Cou-il %t,, hin;ron Report is pabli?h,d bi-ucrk;~ by t c Anlvncan Sacoritr by subscription or. ly.Pi,rr:rr:rr pl_-ale se nd form 3579 to 2 ri l N. Slain Strce t,Culp,^;cr, Vu giro "'St
Counca Frrss at .'Q1 N. 'lam Su:c t. C:i: ;,, \'ir~:n 2":)IS.:b Vrr:p ri r., i, Co '-d
States, U. $ '111 ; n i . 3 J Canada S I ri a r A d d w I.r. r? at 7tee sn h p?ripaid Copy r t t 1970 by A+?cr. ~~ S:rurty Coun. J All (.!,'s rc~?rsyd e~-rl t ih. r n .~i i pin: A
Printed in U.S.A. S end siu s rocr, ce pa J at C u tp