PROBLEMS IN MAINTAINING ATTACHE PRESENCE (U)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80R01731R001900100016-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 12
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 19, 2005
• Sequence Number: 16
• Publication Date: May 9, 1973
• Content Type: MF

COPY SECR J
Approved For Release 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80R01 1 R001900100016-8
S-10,067/AA-1/Mr. Funk/48486/7 May 73/caw
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
1. (C) Since 1965, there have been continuing difficulties
with Department of State, not only in pressure by State to reduce
authorized attache manning, but also in preventing the Defense
Intelligence Agency from assigning replacement personnel to existing
approved positions.
2. (C) Although President Kennedy indicated in 1962 that he wanted
Army, Navy and Air Force Attaches in every country where the United
States has a diplomatic mission, and. Presidential guidance in 1966
directed action to extend and improve the use of the Attaches,
authorized manning for the Defense Attache System has declined from 1880
to 981 since 1965. Most of the reductions in attache manning took place
in 1968-1969, as a result of the BALFA (Balance of Payments) reductions
in U.S. overseas manning directed by President Johnson. The magnitude
of these reductions and their distribution among agencies were largely
determined by the Department of State. On 27 March 1970, Deputy
Secretary of Defense Packard acted to forestall additional reductions
in the DAS by appealing to Dr. Henry A. Kissinger, the President's Assist-
ant for National Security Affairs. On 26 May 1970, Dr. Kissinger
advised Defense that the President had agreed to suspend further reduc-
tions in the attache system.
3. (C) On 29 August 1971, Deputy Secretary of Defense Packard wrote
to Secretary of State Rogers to register Defense concern with mounting
presssure from State to reduce the number and size of Defense Attache
Offices. In his letter, Secretary Packard noted that problems arise when
Embassy personnel attempt to evaluate a specific Defense Attache office
solely in relation to its contribution to the State Department mission.
Citing the sizable reductions that had occurred in Defense Attache manning
since 1965, Secretary Packard stated that the Defense Attache System
needed a period of relative stability to allow informal adjustments
free from the requirement to react to additional pressures to reduce.
Although Secretary Packard recommended to Secretary of State Rogers
that a message to the field would assist in reducing misunderstandings on
the issue, State declined to take this action.
DIA and DOS review(s) completed.
JCS review(s) completed.
OSD REVIEW COMPLETED 10/31/03
NSC review(s) completed.
Approved For Release 2006/03/,.7SI--4P80R01731ROO 1900100016-8
1.,,54 na..
 Approved For Release 2006/031El DP80RO1731 R001900100016-8
0 7-U
4. (C) Despite Dr. Kissinger's memorandum of 26 May 1970, suspending
personnel reductions in the Defense Attache System, Department of
State is unilaterally reducing the DAS at a time when our need for
attaches, because of command drawdowns and increased monitoring respon-
sibilities in Asia and Eastern Europe, is steadily increasing. Since
1963, attache manning has been reduced by 58 percent.
5. (C) Per our conversation on 4 May 1973, I am forwarding a summary
of the problems experienced by the Defense Intelligence Agency in
maintaining adequate levels in attache manning for use by you and
Deputy Secretary Clements in discussions with Dr. Kissinger. I have
also included a draft memorandum to serve as the basis for new
Presidential guidance.
6. (C) I am also providing a copy of this material to Admiral Anderson,
Chairman, President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, to keep him
informed. I discussed the matter with him on 9 May. He will act in our
behalf.
s/ V. P. de POIX
2 Enclosures V. P. de POIX
1. Summary of Problems Vice Admiral, USN
in Maintaining Attache Director
Presence (S)
2. Draft Memorandum to
Secretary of State (C)
cc: Director, Joint Staff
Approved For Release 2006/03/17 PR01731 R001900100016-8
 Approved For Release 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80R01731 R001900100016-8
SLf~J oii fli~.'7' ;fit. r' ~_rt'i'l
1, j. , j i i?t C.
:I (C) Since l,'6 there ,h >ve beer. con
_ ,tin dif ficulti_ s
t':J.th Papa amen t of State,' not o Ly in pressure by State 40
reduce authorized attache manning, but also in. ores eating the
Defense _C::tellig-once A` ency from assignin replacement personnel
to exist approved positions. Curr'en_tly, State is un ..laV-er--
a lly forcing reductions in Defense Attach manning desp'! t the
Presidential u',"- ance contained in Dr. Kiss inger's I-omora.r_uuo
of 26 May 1970 suspending reductions in attache I; a;_ning.
These reductions are being forced at a .':hen our need f or
attaches, because o=' co=,and. d_rG.- c'r;ns and increased monitor 7'
r eso ~nsibil ti eS in Asia and Eastern t uro-_e is steadily
increasing.
.2.4 (C) For purposes of perspective, pre,,ious 1:%h"! to House
guidance on attaches should be noted. 7n early 190""2 Pr. esidenj_:
Kennedy discussed attache matters .i _th the member's of the Join,-,
Chiefs of Staff. He expressed an interest in seeing as --de a
deployment of military attaches as possible. He asked wh-y there
here not attaches at each capital ,;fie-re the United States had
diploma tic r ep resentativ~es . A Department of Defense memorandu ;'
dated 9 July 1962 reported that the tres ident would lii:e to see
Army, Air Force, and Navy attaches. in every country, especially
in Latin rmerica. In a r+iemorandum to Secretary Nitze on 7
November 1962 President Kennedy noted that attaches can make
both short and long- term contributions of -a-* or si1r-1n_-!f'_icance
In the short--term, in President _11--n. eedy=' s view, ,Ta valuable
assessment of the political and military situation in a country
can be Ii ade by attaches because of their access to in for~mat ion
resulting fro;:: respect held by most foreigners for our mil
pot:erI1, particularly where the host country military have a
prominent role. in the long--terr:m, the Mencra ndurl continued,
"the admiration attaches earn. 'or the United States and the
bonds of friendship they forge with the Ieaders of these
countries can be of inestimable va-LlUe to t-11-)-is country in
the use of service attaches1t, and designated Africa, Asia,
and Latin AT erica -Co receive emphasis. f:iui dance became
directive upon DIA on 16 August 1956 by action of the Senior
Interdepartmental Group.
President Johnson, recommended action to "extends and improve
1966, General 10ax.?well D. Taylor, Presidential Advisor to
3. (S) The foregoing White House :guidance on increasing the
size of the attache system occurred at the time when that system
-7 F"WA, C4-7"N E
Approved For Release 2006/03/17 CIA-RDP 04rUF Dd1C-9.0b_ 16L8 = ate:`
(_~. ~: ir. T~ I ON l?I\~ t++.\C.~: _ _(. ----------
e .t0 '(, ~?A.-
1
 Approved For Release 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80R01731 R001900100016-8
was at its greatest numbers:- Major reductions in attache manning
took place in 1968--?1969 as a result of the balance of payments
(BALPA) reductions in U... oVerseas manning directed by President
Johnson. The magnitude ,of these reductions and their distri--
bution among agencies tier e largely determined by the Department
of State which required the attache offices to take proportion-
ately heavier cuts than other agencies. Similar reductions
took place in 1970 under the Presidentially-directed overseas25X1
personnel reduction project (OPRED). In 1970, Defense was
ys em wouicl be 1024 on 1 July 1.970 (represent-
ing 856 fewer personnel than the 1880 authorized for 19645)
Deputy Secretary of Defense David Packard decided to appeal
?further reductions. In his memorandum, dated 27 'March 1970, he
cited the many benefits provided by attaches, noted the pre-
ceding five years of personnel turbulence in DAS manning, and
concluded with the statement that further attache reductions
"would not appear to be in the best interests of the Department
of Defense and the United States Government".
4. (C) On 26 May 1970, Dr. Henry A. Kissinger advised the Depkity
Secretary of Defense as follows:
"After. reviewing your memorandum of March 27, 1970, the
President agreed to.suspend further reductions in the military
attache system as you recommended".
5. (C) Again on 20 August 1971, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Packard wrote to. Secretary of State Rogers to register continued
Defense concern with new pressure from State to reduce the number
and size of Defense Attache Offices. As noted in Secretary
Packard's letter, "problems arise when Embassy personnel attempt
to evaluate a specific DAO solely in relation to its contribution
to the State Department Mission". Citing the sizable re-
ductions that had occurred in Defense Attache manning since
1965, Secretary Packard stated that the Defense Attache System
needed a period of relative stability to allow informal adjust-
ments free from the requirement to react to additional pressures
to reduce. Secretary Packard noted that the need for st.abili--
zation in attache manning had been agreed to by the President
in 1970 and enclosed a copy of Dr. Kissinger.'s memorandum of
May 1970 suspending reductions.
6. (C) Although Secretary Packard had urged that State send a
message to U.S. embassies to clarify U.S. policy on this
matter, State's reply, 2 September 1971, from U. Alexis Johnson,
Undersecretary of State for Po ! it_i.cal Affairs, advised that
Approved For Release 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80ROl731 R001900100016-8
 Approved For Release 2006/03/17 : CIA-RDP80R01731 R001900100016-8
there was no car:;)_ :i ;n in the 1)en r~ - r, cl 3age to reduce the
t is a~. :' iz,_o_.. a tacf1 ^
:b c.. dC>rC=, buU. Gn.i^_SI J...One d -the U:.lc.fU. .neSS Of certa_* n service
`_ `..
:.,-1_
=~,, ~- oc,
.~,ic.._~, each of these r?.U .. _ ~_ ._~?1, __ t4 and
?e r v 1 J Q c nd..e et ry
Y> :c rl e? s s of ,c;n r1:.. ecr .
.ioon =i_ud c2f;cd that by 'igas oppose d. to ..v=. .:.ng ny guidance to
the field exe: p T ing at tao}!C'S from i,:an i1i' er reduc ions .
7. (C) Autho zed mann-i n ; for the De en ach Sti stet" __s
1880 f ure
over t' c
no : C1C)1?in to 90' , a re .uc ion. of
1 l^ 5O,~r f'rc~ i;7_ ~._..~..
of !9)65 and a r~. `^du~.s ctic1 a the n .a-z-1--um ?_3~ 45 'g Y
of 1963. Despite Dr. Kiss.:i_n`.er t s memoranda.. cf 20' t. ay 10( 0
tho Witt ..-, sy s t em, em, the
sus rie r-"tir? t? _ ~1e u c
yr de i e n s
s : Cl _i. 1 'UC, ~._
Depa' ~' 'n' of State is u= gin s tll _ ''.r the reductions in _ e
7 1,_ the system ca 4 a time '.ihen our in ell i Bence restu?i._ ...._._e _n s
are incr e Asir; and our other resources fo, _`Lnt-_lligence
collection are dinishing .
~. (C) The De,-,a-_,- ;ment of State continues to delay the re-
ilf
ope'in, of attache o ices in are- -s of cu_ rrent intelligence
t,an.ga1~iCc , t %ti ey-.tLi,_
interest (.a SU.Ct2. ,,,, . rc . to.:~~1) arid preve1in 's v he augmentation Of
attache offices, a ~ are Tc'...r';-,Gnt= _-C, :.There c:...'t C`iat1Gtn',l at ~ t.?~`?C he S _ ~7' i?. ~ b,.y the
priority of existing ir?tel7i~:'~r r r enr's for reg o l=l
4
DIA 25X1 inte?_ligence covera cw; e (e.g. , f 0;' cover c e of the
25X6 middle East and the Persian Gulf . '
9. (C) Ot'7er examples of manning problems with the Department
of State are as follor: s
a. Despite the objectives of the i'?:SC- pproved study of
1 d~ 7 1 e b a ~ t t_ Q U.S. agencies e r c c O . _ ? t ed Q Dior k to ards
- ~: -_ r ~:- .~, ~ r' iii L :,
e... G. 7 G? p ..~ r r _+t_ t L. nJ. ~t i .. e S i r' G amr r ~. ~ pp Ort , ;,- i t f1 ~?; .. e y L~. ~? . ~ ev' ca n
+E,:'lC] c: n c ~. ~. ~? n 1`t _.. ~. u ~_
officials and to augment selected DA_O 1 S, State has been
y re SLi'_'ing for attache reductions in Ve ~._ and Dominican
Republic (1912-1973)?
b. . Denied approval for assignment of an Army A;,tache
in fonduras (1971-1972)
he
o~ r the Defense _ .tt__,h: _ Army Attache
C. Denied placement J ,
Cost? Rica in 1971, f orci