FOR THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN ROOM 7117 NORTH INTERIOR BUILDING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 13
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 14, 2006
• Sequence Number: 11
• Publication Date: July 17, 1947
• Content Type: MIN

+ T n
Approved For Release 2066/10
A, DP85S00362R000700010011-1
t l
I.A.B. 14th Meeting COPY NO. 3
INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY BOARD
For the Meeting to be held in Room 7117
North Interior Building
on Thursday, 17 July 1947 at 2:30 P. M.
1. ACTION BY THE INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY BOARD ON MATTERS
SUBMITTED TO THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AUTHORITY-
CIG 24, CIG 24/1 and Minutes of 13th IAB Meeting)
For consideration of the recommendations contained in
CIG 24.and CIG 24/1.
2. AMENDIMiNT OF THE DEFINITION OF STRATEGIC AND NATIONAL
POLICY INTELLIGENCE
I B 2, and Minutes of 13th IAB Meeting)
For consideration of the recommendations contained in
IAB 2.
4. CIG REPRESENTATION ON U. S. GOVERNAIIMTT OMISSIONS ABROAD
IAB 4
For consideration of the recommendations3 contained in
JAB 4.
Secretary,
13
I A B. 14th Meeting
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85SO0362ROO0700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
 'Approved. For Release 2006/12/1 j 1P85S00362 R0007000 10011-1
IAB 14th Meeting
2. ACTION BY THE INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY BOARD
ON WTTFRS S TIT +ED TO THE' NA O
IN EL I EPT U HORI
IG 24 an T24/1)
THE DIRECTOR stated the purpose of CIG 24 and CIG 24/1
was to formalize procedure on matters submitted to the
National Intelligence Authority. He said he did not
believe that the Director of Central Intelligence as a
member of the National Intelligence Authority could
correctly make the Intelligence Advisory Board, which
was created solely for the purpose of advising the
Director of Central Intelligence, privy to all matters
presented to the National Intelligence Authority. He
noted that in the last two months he had received calls
from Admiral Leahy and Secretary Forrestal on matters
that did not concern the coordination of intelligence.
He further stated that up until the last N.I.A. meeting
there had been no agenda published. However, prior to
that meeting Secretary Forrestal requested that an agenda
be published. An agonda..waa prepared,."And..cireul*Aedeito
rbh.d;;member 1AB.-.atenQies.
I.M. EDDY stated that the State Department was
wholly in agreement with CIG 24/1 with the exception of
two changes, one of which was substantive and the other
one of clarification, the substantive change being that
on matters involving the request for personnel or facilities
by CIG to the member agencies that such requests should be
submitted to the IAB in writing prior to submission to the
N.I.A.
In this connection Mr. Eddy noted that the
President's letter of 22 January 1946 stated in part that
full uAse shall be made by the Director of Central Intelli-
gence of the staff and facilities of the merlber IAB agencies.
THE DIRECTOR read paragraphs 3 a, b and c of the
above-mentioned letter.
SECRET
lAB 14th Meeting - 5 -
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85SO0362R000700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/1F:FY85S00362R000700010011-1
I.A.B. 14th Meeting
INTLPLLIGE TCF ADVISORY BOARD
Minutes of Meetin held in Room 7117
North Interior ui in ==v
on Thurs ay, 17 u y 194 at 2:30 P.M.
Rear Admiral R. H. Hillenkoetter, Director
of Central Intelligence, in the Chair
R!IEMBFRS PRESENT
Mr. William A. Eddy, Special Assistant to
the Secretary of State for Research
and Intelligence
Maj. General Stephen J. Chamberlin,
Director of Intelligence, WDGS
Rear Admiral Thomas B. Inglis, Chief of
Naval Intelligence
Maj. General George C. McDonald, Assistant
. Chief of Air Staff-2
ALSO PRESENT
Mr. Donald Edgar, Central Intelligence
Group
Mr. Park Armstrong, Department of State
Colonel Riley F. Ennis, WDGS
Capt. R. K. Davis, USN
Lt. Colonel Edgar J. Treacy, WDGS
Major W. C. Baird, AAF-2
SFCRETARIA T
Mr. J. S. Farman, Secretary, N.I.A.
SECRET
IAB 14th Meeting - 1 -
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R0007,00010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/1211 SEWT P85SO0362R000700010011-1
IAB 14th Meeting
Upon being asked by the Director ADMIRAL INGLIS
replied that he went along with the change recommended by
Mr. Eddy, and further that he had a number of other ex-
ceptions as to the whole philosophy of CIG's position as
set forth in the discussion of CIG 24/1. He said he-took
particular exception to the item in paragraph 1 of the
recommendations in CIG 24/1, which stated: "The Director
of Central Intelligence shall be the sole judge of the ad-
visability of referring any proposed recommendation to a
special studies group or for otherwise delaying the sub-
mission of the recommendation to the National Intelligence
Authority."
THE DIRECTOR stated that he believed that item was
a result of the delays in receiving recommendations from
ad hoc committees appointed by the Intelligence Advisory
Board.
ADMIRAL INGLIS stated he also took exception to
that part of CIG 24/1 which required the IAB to submit any
desired statement of-non-concurrence in one week.
THE DIRECTOR stated that he was often limited in
time in the preparation of replies to other agencies and
cited for an example the urgent request of the Atomic
Energy Commission for comments of the National Intelligence
Authority on the proposed intelligence organization within
the Atomic Energy Commission.
ADTHIRAL INGLIS noted that in reality any paper
sent to the Intelligence Advisory Board for consideration
could not be answered by "yes" or "no."
G__rZTERAL McDOFALD stated it was his opinion that by
allowing a week and in some cases less for consideration of
a paper the work was being taken out of the hands of the
intelligence staffs and was being performed by the members
of the IAB.
THE DIRECTOR stated he agreed with General McDonald
but he still felt there should be some time limitation set
on papers circulated to the IAB for comment.
SECRET
IAB 14th Meeting - 6 -
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
 85S00362R000700010011-1
Approved For Release 2006/12/15s ``
IAB 14th Meeting
ADMIRAL INGLIS stated that in cases where urgency
was of the essence, if a statement to that effect were
indicated he would do all in his power to return his com-
ments in the time allotted. Admiral Inglis went on to
state that Secretary Forrestal had told him that he ex-
pected the IAB to thresh out and reconcile their differences
on papers before they were submitted to the rT.I.A., and
further that Mr. Forrestal did not like the recent procedure
of submitting recommendations to the N.I.A. without having
such recommendations discussed by the intelligence chiefs
of that Authority. Admiral Inglis said, however, he recog-
nized that the Director of Central Intelligence had en-
countered from time to time inordinate delays in IAB
handling of papers and he sympathized with the desire to
reduce such delays.
ADMIn,AL INGLIS also stated that it was his opinion
that paragraph 3 of 113.I.A. Directive No. 1 did not restrict
the matters which are referred to the IAB to matters
related to coordination. Admiral In?_lis
not in agreement with paragraph 4 of the
CIG 24/1, which read:
"Recommendations
Director of Central Intelligence
Authority arc not considered
provided ii N.I.A. Directive
by the
as falling
1,
said he was also
discussion in
requested of the
National intelligence
into the pattern
paragraph 3, nor is it
considered that it was the intent of the President or of
the National Intelligence Authority that all reports,
papers, and statements prepared by the Director of
Central Intelligence for presentation to the National
Intelligence Authority be first submitted to the
Intelligence Advisory Board'for advisory opinion" since
a great deal depended upon the subject matter presented
to the N.I.A.
IAB 14th McetinZ - 7 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85SO0362R000700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/1F5:~85S00362R000700010011-1
IAB 14th Meeting
THE DIRECTOR stated that he agreed with Admiral
Inglis and suggested that the word "all" precede the word
"recommendations" in the beginning of the above-quoted
paragraph.
ADMIRAL INGLIS stated since the Director of Central
Intelligence was a non-voting member of the National
Intelligence Authority, it was his opinion that this fact
gave a different implication to the statement contained in
CI G 24/1 that "The Director of Central Intelligence as a
member of the National Intell-igenc.e Authority can not
correctly make the Intelligence Advisory Board, which was
created solely for'the purpose of advising him, privy to
all matters before the National Intelligence Authority."
He went on to state that he certainly assumed from the
reasoning behind the organization of the Intelligence
Advisory Board that that Board should be privy to
practically all matters going to the National Intelligence
Authority.
THE DIRECTOR stated he agreed with the viewpoint of
,&dmiral Inglis that practically all matters presented to the
National Intelligence Authority should have had prior dis-
cussion by the Intelligence Advisory Board. He noted,
however, that it would be difficult to define in advance
those matters which should go to the National Intelligence
Authority without previous IAB discussion.
AD1AIRAL INGLIS stated with reference to the prepar-
ation and circulation of formalized agenda for NIA meetings
that it was Mr. Forrestal's desire that agenda should be
prepared by the Secretary, N.I.A., and items thereon dis-
cussed by the IAB prior to their discussion by the N.I.A.
MR. EDDY noted that even if formalized agenda for
N.I.A. meetings were prepared that the Intelligence
Advisory Board could not expect that the N.I.A. would not
discuss other matters than those appearing on the agenda,
if they so desired.
I`B 14th Meeting _ 8 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85SO0362ROO0700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/15~~~,Ktp~85S00362R000700010011-1
TAB 14th Meet I.,&
ADMIRAL INGLIS stated that it was not the intent
that the National Intelligence Authority could not dis-
cuss any matter they saw fit. However, he was advocating
that the Intelligence Advisory Board use the same procedure
as used by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, i.e., that all
matters be thoroughly discussed and differences reconciled
on the working level prior to submission to a higher
authority.
GENERAL CHAMBERLIN stated that he was in agreement
with Admiral Inglis that there should be an agenda prepared
for I\'.I.A. meetings, and further if the AT.I.A. chooses to
bring up items other than those appearing on the agenda
that was, of course, their prerogative.
ADTIIRAL INGLIS stated that it was his opinion that
the provisions of the last three sentences lmder the dis-
cussion in CIG 24/1 were unsound, and further that neither the
Director of Central Intelligence nor any other lone member
of the Intelligence Advisory Board could nullify the de-
sires of all other members in sending any paper to the
National Intelligence Authority. He pointed out that he
did not believe it was practicable to require the head of
one of the intelligence agencies to go through his secre-
tary in order to get a paper to the National Intelligence
Authority, and further that such a practice was not fair
to the members of the N.I,A,, not to have tht advice of
the Intelligence Advisory Board. He also said it was his
opinion that the logical and practical way to submit papers
to the N.I.A. was through the IAB with the recommendations,
if any, of the members of the IAB appended to such papers
in the event agreement could not be reached. Admiral
Inglis went on to say that this procedure was followed by
the Joint Chiefs of Staff and any other way seemed irregular
to him.
TAB 14th MMeee
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/1 85300362R000700010011-1
IAB 14th Meeting
MR. EDGAR stated that the N.I.A. and the IAB
were not comparable to the JCS and JIC. The JCS has a
committee where the N.I.A, has a Director of Central
Intelligence who is an individual responsible for certain
activities and the IAB is merely advisory to him.
ADMIRAL INGLIS stated that he did not agree that
the IAB was merely advisory to the Director of Central
Intelligence and further it was not intended it the
philosophy that established the IAB.
MR. EDGAR said that the title of the IAB indicated
that it was in fact an advisory body.
ADMIRAL INGLIS stated that he did not believe this
was the concept. He said the IA.B, in addition to being an
advisory body, is also an implementing 'body, and further
the IAB is a liaison channel between the Director of
Central Intelligence and the member agencies. It also
permits the heads of the intelligence services themselves
to implement and take special personal interest in the
work of the CIG. He pointed out that the IAB was intended
to make the heads of intelligence services share the re-
sponsibility of the success of CIG and in sharing this
responsibility the members of the IAB must have e certain
amount of authority,
MR. EDDY stated it appeared to him that to send a
paper to the IN.I.A. without the concurrence of the
Director of Central Intelligence and the majority of the
members of the IAB would be expecting a lot of the N.I.A.
ADMIRAL INGLIS thought that any member of the TAB
who filed a paper should get the concurrence of not less
than one other member. However, if it was desired to
adjust this to a majority, that was a compromise, and that
he did not feel too strongly one way or the other.
IAB 14th Meeting - 10 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
 .Approved For Release 2006/12/1 kd -J2fP85S00362R000700010011-1
IAB 14th Meeting
GENERAL CHAMBERLIN stated that he thought the IA B
might approach the overall question better if CIG 24 and
CIG 24/1 were withdrawn and a complete new paper prepared.
He went on to state that he objected to CIG 24/1 somewhat
along the lines of Admiral Inglis. He-said he agreed
perfectly with Admiral Inglis that the IAB was a little
more than an advisory body and further that the idea that
the IAB had authority to commit their own departments to
action could be justified. He went on to state that the
success of intelligence in the government is dependent
entirely on cooperation. He said that the above was a
general summery of his feeling. However, ne had other
objections in detail and believed that time could be saved
by appointing an ad hoc committee to redraft a new paper.
MR. EDDY stated that he would agree to the
appointment of an ad hoc committee to redraft a new paper.
However, he believed that a close examination of the recom-
mendations contained in CIG 24/1 left nothing to be
desired, and further that he hoped that the ad hoc com-
mittee, if eppointed, could start with these recommendations
and see how they could be amended. He went on to say he
did not find much in the recommendations which would not
be acceptable to him.
GITTFRAL McDOiTALD, upon being asked by the Director,
agreed to the appointment of the ad hoc committee mentioned
above.
ADMIRAL INGLIS asked Mr. Eddy whether the ad hoc
committee in drawing up a new paper should restrict itself
to the recommendations contained in CIG 24/1.
MR. EDDY replied that he hoped that they would con-
sider the recommendations and that in the main these recom-
mendations could form a basis for the new paper.
IAB 14th Meeting - 11 -
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/15~*~85SO0362R000700010011-1
IAB 14th Meeting
After some discussion where it was noted by
Admiral Inglis that he felt that the IAB should have
a staff as did the SIC,
THE INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY BOARD
Agreed to appoint an ad hoc committee to
submit a new paper on the subject of action
by the Intelligence Advisory Board on
matters submitted to the National Intelligence
Authority, the committee to consist of Mr.
Edgar, Mr. Armstrong, Lt. Col. Treaty,
Capt. Davis and Col. Mussett.
3. A10--'NDIvfl ?T OF THE DEFINITION OF STRATEGIC
ATN?D NA TIONA PO IC ITT r?LLI Y _
IAB 2)
THE DIRECTOR stated that the phrase "strategic
and national policy intelligence" had its origin in a
memorandum from General Donovan to the President dated
18 November 1944. Therein General Donovan distinguished
between intelligence pertaining primarily to departmental
action and intelligence material required by the Executive
Branch in planning and carrying out the national policy
and strategy. General Donovan went on to say in this
memorandum that while recognizing that production of the
former must remain decentralized, he contended for cen-
tralization with respect to the latter. He proposed as
one of the functions of the central intelligence agency
the "final evaluation, synthesis, and dissemination within
the government of intelligence required to enable the
government to determine policies-with respect to national
planning and security in puce and war and the advancement
of broad national policy." The Director went on to say
that in a counter proposal prepared by the flS the above
passage was revised and stated that
"Accomplish the synthesis of depart-
mental intelligence relating to the
national security and the appropriate
strategic and not-J..0 irlicy intelligence."
IAB 14th Mcating - 12 -
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/1 t'k~' PI~P8SSOO362 R0007000 10011-1
IAH,4th MpE-ting
This counter proposal was -in turn carried over into the
President's letter of 22 January 1946 with the substitution
of "correlation and evaluation" for "synthesis" and the
deletion of "department^l." The Director said that Admiral
Souers -..ttributcd the first change to the more preference
of Latin to Greek. The second was intended to deemphesize
the idea of dependence on depar.tmentrl agencies. A new
sentence was added to require their full (but not exclusive)
use. The Director said the JIS draft, which served even-
tually as the basis of the President's letter, was based
on the following concepts:
a. That each department would continue to
produce the intelligence required to meet
its own operating needs (i.e. pertaining
primarily to departmental action).
b. That such intelligence was inadequate
as a basis for national strategy and policy
(i.e. for decisions transcending the re-
sponsibilities of cry particul::ir department).
c. That a central agency free of departmental
bins was required to provide, through
evaluation and synthesis, the intelligence
required as a basis for such decisions.
THE DIRECTOR said that from the beginning
strategic and national policy intelligence was conceived
to be one thing, not two. Strategic was used in view of
the emphasis upon relation to national security and
because it was anticipated that the central organization
would supersede the JIC in the realm of overall national
strategy. Notional policy was used to broaden the im-
plicctions of strategic to exclude, on the one hand, such
matters of operational strategy as purely military,-31Qxs
for the seizure of Okinawa, and to include on the other
!AB 14th Meeting
SECRET
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-R?P85S00362R000700010011-1
 Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85S00362R000700010011-1
Next 3 Page(s) In Document Denied
Approved For Release 2006/12/15: CIA-RDP85SO0362R000700010011-1