COLBY BAILEY AND WERNER FORM NEW INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING FIRM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00901R000500060004-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 15
• Document Creation Date: January 4, 2017
• Document Release Date: April 28, 2008
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: January 15, 1985
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
STAT
- COLBY, BAILEY, WERNER & ASSOC
W ilcam E Co't>y
Nor? w, A Bailey
Robert F Werner
January 15, 1985
5 p.m.
For immediate release
COLBY, BAILEY AND WERNER FORM NEW INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING FIRM
Special Partners. William E. Colby, former Director of Central Intelligence,
Consonant I. 'mr,ea Norman A. Bailey, former Special Assistant to President Reagan
Gregory R Copley for National. Security Affairs and Senior Director of Internation-
Chairman ano Publisher
Defen>c & Foreign Affairs
Trar,sNational, Inc al Econanic Affairs of the National Security Council, and Robert
Raymond J. Walrimann
Chet F. Werner, founder of The Washington Forum, will be the general
Cha~rma^ and d Chef
Executive Oft cer
partners in their new international consulting firm, Colby,
Bailey, Werner & Associates. In addition, Colby, Bailey, Werner & Associates
will initially have three special partners:
? Gregory R. Copley, Chairman and Publisher of Defense & Foreign
Affairs, and President of the International Strategic Studies
Association.
Consonant Limited, a consulting firm that specializes in large-
scale information resources management for organizations that
have significant stakes in teleccmnunications and the informa-
tion-age markets.
? TransNational, Inc., a consulting firm specializing in inter-
national trade and investment, headed by Raymond Waldmann,
former Assistant Secretary of Cammerce.
Colby, Bailey, Werner & Associates will provide consulting services to
U.S. and foreign-based multinational corporations, banks, foreign governments
and quasi-governmental bodies, U.S. trade associations, labor unions, institu-
2550 M Street, N.W.. Suite 405 ? Washington, D.C. 2(X)37 ? Phone [phone]
Telex: 248843 GRI UR
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
tional investors, investment banking and brokerage firms, and accounting,
law, and management consulting firms.
In addition to analyzing and forecasting U.S. and foreign government
policy, the partnership will provide:
? analysis of the international debt problen and other major
international political, economic, financial, and trade
problems.
? analysis of U.S. and foreign government defense and security
policy, and their impact on the investment climate.
? advice, counsel, and assistance regarding direct foreign in-
vestment in the U.S.
? assistance with other types of investment banking activities.
? counsel and assistance to U.S. companies wishing to trade abroad
and foreign companies wishing to trade in the U.S., including
guidance on government policies affecting trade.
? consulting on telecommunications, information resource manage-
ment, and related activities.
For further information, contact
Robert F. Werner [phone]
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901
2 9 JAN 1985
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
ROUTING SLIP
E cutive Secret
28 Jan 85
_---
oa+.
3637 (10.81)
;C
11 3
;ompt
12
00
13 >/Pers
/OLL
/PAO
SA/ A
117 AO/DCI
C/IPD/OIS
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
X
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
~ArMnt F r Fri( ,~'{r,0 11 January 1985
T?he Anchorman Chronicles:
By D the barroom piano would have stopped 'e're told. of a football field." Colby re-
Talking HENNINGER
Talking with the Russians is good. dead. "I think," said John Chancellor, plied that "we are looking at a system that
T.- iking about nuclear-arms reduction is leaning in, "what we have here is an enor- is no strategic threat to us," adding later
mously important event. We are talking that we "shouldn't have our whole negoti-
;;ood. about the next generation of the nuclear acing posture hostage to absolute verifica-
I hold hese truths to be self vvident, age-weapons in space." tinn " which is a fairly ama ina posture
because I h have been watching television. I
have been watching the Talks between Then Tom Brokaw, who is. after all, the for someone in charge of U.S. ntellr
George Shultz ar. Andrei Gromyko as re- actual anchorman, practically came out of 9 Olee of the most striking remarks Hart
ported from Geneva by Dan Rather, Tom his chair to raise the ante: "The two most
Brokaw, Peter Jennings, David Hartman, powerful nations in the history of civiliza- man elicited was from Jimmy Carter's
Bryant Gumbel, John Chancellor and Bill tion, with enough weaponry and enoubh chief SALT II negotiator, Paul Warnke, Moyers. The original Gospel had four nuclear warheads to destroy the planet, who
seemed the willing Ming to to write ite off f a if substan-
Evangelists, Evangelists, but arms control has seven. have come together in Geneva. Why part
George Will, an unbeliever whom one ex- shouldn't we give it all the attention we get an arms-control treaty. Hartman
asked: "How much linkage should we de-
p?tied to see stoned off the air by his col- can possibly muster." nand regarding the Soviets' conduct in Af-
leagues, told Peter Jennings on Tuesday It was also a tough assignment for cam-
night that he doubted there would be an- eramen. The most dynamic image re- ghanistan when it comes to negotiating?"
other significan. arms agreement "in our corded during the meetings appears to "Linkage" u ght to o be sar ppd." Warnk
ruse
lifetime or our children's lifetime." But have been Andrei Gromyko walking eplie. We're the W i at is one man's opinion against the force through a doorway, lifting off his hat and ness because it's good for us. And if it's
of an idea? On Wednesday night, Peter saying, "Gut bye, and best wishes to good for us, the fact that the Soviet Union
Jennings offered a report on how the an- you.- is behaving badly elsewhere should not
nouncement of the resumed Talks was This is not to suggest that the networks' change our determination." This has a late
playing on the streets of Russia: "And huge presence in Geneva was of no value. 1930ish ring to it, but again, that was so
from Moscow, the report of an elderly Quite the contrary. A viewer interested in long ago.
woman who said, 'I keep listening to hear arms control, strategic issues generally or After a while, I began to wonder how
it again; I have hope that my grandson East-West relations could have obtained an David Hartman was coming up with so
will never know war.' " extremely interesting overview during many interesting interviews. The reason, I
On the previous evening, Dan Rather these broadcasts-but from a wholly unex- think, is that he approaches these big sub-
had spoken of hc,ving at last broken the pected source. The Big Three-Brokaw, jects essentially as an outsider looking in,
"dialogue deadlock." And Bill Moyers Rather and Jennings-were unexceptional. as a sort of informed Everyman. I doubt
cited as reason for Talking the "testimony They competently described the context that Brokaw, Rather, Jennings or nearly
of t:r,e ghosts who haunt this hall of the for the meeting, and Jennings was particu- any of TV's specialized reporters would
eague of Nations," in which he was larly good on Europe's relations with the have asked Bill Colby about a Soviet radar
League'
standing. Note: Established to prevent U.S. and the Soviets. The evening news "big as a football field" or dragged At-
conflict after World War I, the League fell shows also did some remarkable anima- ghanistan into a conversation with Paul
into disuse after Japan invaded Man- tions of how antimissile satellites and la- Warnke. More likely they'd ask whatever
churia, Italy conquered Ethiopia and Ger- sers might shoot down incoming Soviet leading-edge questions are being discussed
ICBMs. Probably sold millions of people by Washington's consensus builders, which
mane repudiated the Treaty of Versailles. on the concept. But the really useful work nine times out of 10 produce noncommittal
idded, Hiker somewhat discredited the was done by David Hartman of ABC's replies. They are insiders talking to in-
idea of Talking, but that was a long time Good Morning, America." siders. Most of the time that doesn't pro-
ago.) Hartman conducted interviews with a duce very good television; the Sunday
Anchorman :`iega 4attage remarkable number of specialists on stra morning interview programs have proved
Measured in anchorman watts, the tegic and Soviet affairs inchidine Harold that for years.
Shultz-Gromyko meeting was surely the Brown. Paul Warnke Henry Kissinger
brightest showcase for TV news since the (from Hong Kong; the man must carry a Jet-Lagged Incoherence
Republican convention. In fact. when word beeper) Marshall Goldman, Gerard Smith of course, David Hartman is a product
got out that all three anchormen would be and William Colby. Ideologically, this is a of television, so it was inevitable that he
doing their evening newscasts from Ge- ,n motley crew rut their replies to would eventually throw up an airball like
neva. I thought the networks might have Human were often telling and reveal this question to national security adviser
set the meeting up themselves. Something ing. Robert McFarlane: "How have you
similar seems to have occurred to "To- Nobody criticized Talking; indeed, changed in the last 48 hours?" I thought
day's" Bryant Gumbel on Tuesday morn- Hartman's guest list was notably lacking McFarlane was going to laugh in his face.
ing, when he suddenly found himself inter- in a serious critic of the arms-control pro- In fact, by Wednesday the entire network-
view ng Tom Brokaw and John Chancellor, cess, such as Sen. Steve Symms. But the news effort seemed to have lapsed into jet-
with additional dialogue by Marvin Kalb. qualifications and caveats piled up in lagged incoherence.
It was quite fantastic. I drifts. Harold Brown is being widely cited -
"Henry Kissinger," said Gumbel, "has now as a full opponent of the administra-
raised the prospect that what we're en- tion's missile-defense proposal, but speak- CO '
gaged in here is media hype. Marvin?" ing with David Hartman he sounded like a
"Well," said Kalb, in a comment that skeptic who isn't ready yet to throw in with
should he enshrined in the Museum of either camp. "I'm not optimistic about the
Broadcasting, "it has become a media talks," he said, noting "questions of Soviet
event in the sense that there are perhaps compliance with past treaties.",
journalists here at a loftier level than Hartman asked former CIA Di odor
might normally be covering a diplomatic \4'illiam Colby about "this great radar eta-
event.'' If this had been a cowboy movie, tion in Krasnoyarsk which is the size,
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 ~.~..14Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901R000500060004-6
:
N''El YORK TI
ES
t..
e ttt , e
.
22 Dece>rher 1284
debate on Security: Educe
Speda] to The New Yort Times
WASHINGTON, Dec. 21 - The de-
bate on national security versus free-
dom of information, long a staple in
Washington, dominated discussion in
the capital this week. It was
prompted by The Washington Post's
publication of details of the secret
payload of the space shuttle mission
scheduled for next month, and the
condemnation of the newspaper's ar-
ticle by Secretary of Defense Caspar
W. Weinberger.
The New York Times sought com-
ments on the controversy from sev-
- eral Washingtonians prominent in the
fields of national security and the
press. Excerpts follow.-
.
?
Gen. David C. Jones, former Chair-
man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:
Unfortunately, we have arrived at
a point of great confrontation be-
tween the press and the Government
on national security issues and I hope
that we can come to an understanding
on the needs of a free press and the
needs of national security.
At this point, I think that we have
gone too far in revealing information
ith an impact on national security.
combination of leaks, a reporter
putting together bits and pieces of in-
formation, creates lots of problems
between the Government and the
media.
I may be prejudiced, but I feel that
when in doubt, you should lean to-
ward the national security side.
Eric Sevareid, television cowmen=
tator:
A great illusion exits about national
security. Our true security lies in'
peace itself. Our weaponry and sol-
diery provide the first line of defense
of our territory and our vital interests
abroad. But our first line of defense of
peace lies in the- preservation of.
America's free institutions and civil
liberties, including the, First Amend
meat liberties.
If we gradually become like the
Soviets - secretive, paranoid, politi-
cally neurotic - then world tensions
would ultimately become unbear-
able. Hitler said that the strength of -
the totalitarian states is that they'
force their enemies' to immitate
them. I have an unhappy feeling that-.'
this Administration, however unin- .
.tentionally, is edging.us down that
Stanfield M. Turner, Director of
Cen to Bence er iaent
Carter:
I think the press is being very hypo-
critcal. Most agreed with Weinberger
on the need for secrecy and then when
The Post published their story; which
was unconscionable, all the others
used it as excuse to go ahead and
print. One day the mission deserves
secrecy and then the next they jump
on the bandwagon. -
I think the press ought to apply the
following rule: Is what they are going
to print really going to educate the
American people? The details of the
satellite The Wushin;;ton Post printed
were not issues of particular impor-
tance to the American public.
I. F. Stone, the journalist:
One thing puzzles me. This is the
first time in my 44 years in Washing-
ton that 1 have ever heard of calling a
press conference to announce that
you were going to do something se-
cret. If you want to keep a hold on it
and secret, why scurry around town
asking people please not to print it?
That's the surest way of getting it in
print.
Now, the second thing that bothers
me is that this test on Jan. 23 is going
to be a shuttle that is going to carry
some commercial testing and some
milititary testing. If you really want
to keep it secret, why not carry off
military testing under the cover of a
commercial test?
Of course, I am not arguing-that.:-:.
there is never an occasion when a
government has no right to withhold
information. Every law, including...
homocide, has its exceptions, but its
irrelevant to an incident in which the
Pentagon flaunts a secret operation
as if to deliberately invite maximum
visibility.,,
William E. Colby, former Director--
-irate ence:
Government has a legitimate call
for secrecy for some. of its activities'
and there is a tension between that
and the desire of public and the press
especially to know eve rthing. I think
that this tension is healthy. It's part
of our constitutional. sysytem.
There is however, some informa? i
tion that should not be revealed. It re-
mains a judgment call that we wres- i
tle with every day.
On occasion the press has revealed
things when they shouldn't have and
on occasion I'm sure the Government
has witheld information when it was-
n't entirely necessary. .
I think that this Administration is
trying to get better discipline than
perhaps there was in the past.
?
James R. Schlesinger, former
Sec- of Defense and Director of
Central Intelligence:
Balancing the claims of press free-
dom and security must ultimately
rest on a rule of reason. This society,
quite rightly, is unprepared to sacri-
fice either. For this reason one grows
uneasy in times that the press and
government are hurling absolutes at`
one another. It is regrettable and
risky that the Government cannot..
maintain security for its essential
though fragile intelligence activities.
But security has been breaking
down for a generation. That break-
down reflects a loss of national con-
sensus policy. Not only is the press
less inhibited. Not only has the Con-
gress been brought into such matters
(members and staff are not invari-
alby reticent!). Above all, there has
been a breakdown of discipline within
the executive branch.
To preserve secrecy, especially in a
democracy, security must be part of
an accepted pattern of behavior, out-
side of government and inside. Re-
grettably, we no longer have such a
pattern. `
Restoring effective security ar-
rangements, short of a sense of
shared and immediate danger, can
only come from within the executive
branch and by example. Unless the
nation's leaders demonstrate that
they respect the security rules and
will not violate those rules to score
political points against rivals or
make their speeches more colorful,
those further down the hierarchy will
continue gushing (euphemistically
called "leaking"). Rather than being
prepared to suspend curiosity in se-
lected areas, the press wilt find it too
tempting to refrain from publishing
the wealth of information all too read-
ily available.
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 ~3~ ji?~A pUroved For Release 2008/04/26':-61A--R-D'-P-91-00901 R000500060004-6
A C L0 uecember 1`,464
fl id PAGE__ ,
Topic: THE CIA
William E Colby, 64,
was director of the Cen-
tral Intelligence Agency
in the 1970s. Born in Min-
nesota, he served in the
U.S. Army during World
War If, rising to major,
and then joined the Office
of Strategic Services, the
forerunner of the CIA. He
is the author of Honor-
able Men - My Life in
the CIA. Colby was inter-
viewed by free-lance jour-
nalist Phil Moses
William E. Colby
Gathering intelligence
me taking risks
USA TODAY: Do you think
Iran was helping the hijack-
ers who took the Kuwaiti jet
to Tehran and murdered two
Americans?
COLBY: It obviously had
some relationship with the
group that did the hijacking.
But I don't think that group did
it on Iran's orders or even with
conspiracy. I think the Iranians
were less than helpful in the
way they handled it They
knew they had a basic sympa-
thy with the people doing it,
and they were slow to realize
they had an obligation to
straighten out the situation.
USA TODAY: Do you agree
with Secretary of State
George Shultz that the USA
should launch pre-emptive
strikes against terrorists,
even if civilians might be
harmed?
COLBY: Well, if I knew that
somebody was cranking up a
bomb and planned to move it
into the White House to blow it,
up, I would take such steps as I
needed in order to stop that,
from happentng.Tftliaf meant
that I had to bomb something
out of the air in order to do it, I
would. The pieces of the plane
would have to land some place.
Somebody might get hurt. But I
would protect the White House.
USA TODAY: What can be
done to combat terrorism?
COLBY: One rule of terror-
ism is that if it gets serious, it
gets suppressed. It usually gets
suppressed through a combina-
tion of good, intelligence, good
security practices and public
support because the terrorist
becomes the enemy of the pub-
lic. Then the public begins to
help you to control It
USA TODAY: As director of
the Central Intelligence
Agency, you had to be some-
thing of an expert on the Sovi-
et Union. Can the Soviets be
trusted at all?
STAT
COLBY: I have no trust in COLBY: I think the president
the Soviet Union. In 1962, the is quite resolved to achieve
foreign minister of the Soviet some kind of success in the
Union (Andrei Gromyko), who arms control area. I think earli-
is still the foreign minister, lied er he was very uninformed in
directly to President Kennedy it. But I think today he's re-
when he assured him that he solved to achieve some results.
was not going to put any offen- I think he's taken exactly the
sive nuclear missiles into Cuba. right step of getting Paul Nitze
He said that at the very time he to become the leading man to
was doing it. I think we can try to put together some kind of
watch the Soviet Union; we can an agreement I think the presi-
tell through our own devices dent's interest now is in the his-
whether they will be comply- tory books, rather than the
ing with. an agreement we next election.
reach between us or whether
they'll be cheating on it.
USA TODAY: If we can't
verify what weapons they
have, is it worthwhile to
reach any kind of arms agree-
ment with them?
COLBY: It's not worthwhile
if we can't verify it But we can
verify it. If you get into an ar-
cane discussion of whether
verification means you can
identify the last quarter-inch of
the fin of some missile, then
you say no, it's not verifiable.
But if you approach verifica-
tion from what it really is,
which is the protection of your
country against strategic sur-
prise, then you begin to realize
that any kind of a strategic ac-
tion on their side would be tele-
graphed years in advance,
thanks to the intelligence tech-
nology we have with the satel-
lites, the electronics, the acous-
tics. If you have any doubts,
just look at what the Defense
Department publishes about
Soviet weapons.
USA TODAY: Are we ahead
or behind the Soviets in arms?
COLBY: Both nations have
the ability to retaliate absolute-
ly against any use of nuclear
weapons against them. We are
ahead of the Russians in some
weapons. They're ahead of us
in some weapons, and the dif-
ference is inconsequential.
USA TODAY: Do you think
President Reagan really
wants an arms agreement?
By Susan Harlan. USA TODAY
USA TODAY: Before head-
ing the CIA, you served in
Vietnam. Why haven't we
been able to account for all of
our men who are missing in
action?
COLBY: The North Vietnam-
ese have been incredibly cyni-
cal in their use of the remains
of our people killed over there,
handing them out one at a time
to visiting delegations. I think
that our relations with the
North Vietnamese are going to
be very bad for a long time.
Whether there are any Ameri-
cans still living in Vietnam, I
just don't know. I think they
probably, in most cases, died of
natural causes or unnatural
causes, and the North Vietnam-
ese are afraid to admit respon-
sibility.
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 a
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
USA TODAY: In your view,
which nations are the great-
est threat to world peace?
COLBY: The Soviet Union is
obviously the only power on
earth that can destroy the Unit-
ed States with its nuclear weap-
onry. The Soviets have a terri-
ble problem with an awful
economy that they insist on
running in the worst possible
way. They do, however, have
considerable talent in military
activity and a willingness to do
all they need to keep it up. I
think they're very hard-nosed,
difficult to live with. But they
share this great earth of ours,
,nd somehow we've got to
work out a relationship with
them.
USA TODAY: What about
Libya?
COLBY: Libya is led by a :
man (Col. Khadafy) who is
really quite irresponsible. He's
very mercurial. He has an ob-
viously strong hatred for the
Egyptians, and I think he has
ambitions to play a major role
in Northern Africa, which
could run into conflict with sev-
eral other countries in the
neighborhood.
USA TODAY: Does he rep-
resent a potential danger to
our country?
COLBY: Directly, not so
much. To our citizens, through
the help of various terrorists,
yes. He has been of help to ter-
rorists as far away as the Phil-
ippines and Northern Ireland.
through a revolutionary up-
heaval, an ideological Intoxica-
tion, one can say. At this point I
think there is very little to be
done about Iran. But I think in
the long term, there is apt to
arise some new emanation of
the Shah, who will rise up and
say, Enough of this confusion
let's get Iran back to some
sensible form of organization
and policy."
USA TODAY: Cuba?
COLBY: There's a paralysis-
there. The Soviets are going to
support them and I don't think
much change is going to occur.
USA TODAY: Nicaragua?
COLBY: Nicaragua is in a
revolutionary situation. They
want to maintain the revolu-
tionary fervor. But they realize
they're running a substantial
risk of isolation and even pres-
sure from the neighboring
countries -- Including the Unit-
ed States - if they continue in
a hostile attitude.
USA TODAY: What do you
think of the CIA manual that
suggested Nicaraguan offi-
cials be "neutralized"?
COLBY: It was a mistake. It
never should have been writ-
ten. The chain of command
broke down in the process in
which this thing wag produced.
I don't think there was an in-
tent to violate the law. I think
there was just a failure to com-
mand and control.
COLBY: No. It was all Inves-
tigated. Was the CIA out of con-
trol? No, according to the sen-
ate committee. Did the CIA
ever assassinate a foreign lead-
er? No, according to the com-
mittee. Did the CIA violate the
principles against it doing sur-
veillance within the United
States? Yes, to a small degree.
In a few cases - bad cases that
should not have happened. But
certainly, the idea of CIA in ev-
years later?
USA TODAY: During your
CIA tenure, there was talk of
domestic surveillance and
overseas assassination plots
by agents. Any comments 10
ery bedroom in the country
was a gross exaggeration and
just plain wrong.
USA TODAY: Under Direc-
tor William Casey, has the
CIA become too politicized?
COLBY: No, I don't think so.
He has done a good job. He has
organized some of the analyti-
cal parts in a very useful man-
ner. He has encouraged the
agency to step back and get
back to work. He's a risk taker,
which you need to be if you're
going to conduct intelligence
operations. I think he's proba-
bly made mistakes, and he'd
probably tell you so himself.
But I think he's been a very
good leader.
USA TODAY: The CIA is
again recruiting successfully
on college campuses. Is this
part of the new patriotism?
COLBY: There are a lot of
young Americans who would
like to serve their country, who
are willing to serve their coun-
try In a job which demands
unanimity. Intelligence is inter-
esting, challenging, satisfying
work. There are a lot of young
Americans who are willing to
go through the very severe
tests that we have and accept
i
By Susan Harlan, USA TODAY
the limitations on their lifestyle
that will be involved. So I'm not
worried about the future of the
CIA.
USA TODAY: Similarly,
there is a lot more risk work-
ing abroad at an American
embassy now.
COLBY: Sure. But you find
good Americans who are will-
ing to take risks for their coun-
try. I think they should be sup- ,
ported and helped.
USA TODAY: During World
War II, you jumped out of an
airplane In France to work
with the underground. Would
you do anything like that
again?
COLBY: Certainly. For a
cause like that, certainly. I've
risked my life a number of
times. It doesn't bother me, If
it's for a good reason.
TIMELINE: William E. Colby
^ 1920: Born Jan. 20 in St. Paul, Minn.
?1940: Received bachelor's de ree from Princeton
University. Entered Columbia Law School.
111941: Joined U.S. Army, served as paratrooper and
with Office of Strategic Services.
^ 1945: Returned to Columbia, awarded law degree
in 1947.
01947-1949: In private law practice with Donovan,
Leisure, Newton & Irvine firm in New York City.
01949-1950: Worked on the staff of National Labor
Relations Board.
0 1961-1958: Served as an attache at American em-
bassies in Stockholm and Rome.
01959-1962: First secretary, U.S. Embassy, Saigon.
01962-1968: Chief of Far East Division, Central Intel-
ligence Agency.
01968-1971: Director, Civil Operations and Rural
Development Support for U.S. Embassy, Saigon.
01972-1973: Held high positions in the CIA, including
deputy director, operations.
01973-1976: Director, CIA.
01984: Of counsel with law firm of Reid and Priest,
Washington, D.C.
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
R T I C L r AP PL~l IReD NFW YORK TIMES
an P G E -,E 16 December 1984
No Easy Targets
Another aspect of Mr. Shultz's thinking, military re- .
taliation, also seems difficult to apply in such an in.
? stance. What would be the target? The hijackers have
disappeared into Iranian custody. Iran itself is too big a
target, even assuming that concrete evidence of Iranian
collusion could be obtained.
"If you could find a nice little A] Dawa training cam
soMM ace, you c out at, o se
D re o y
ere yawn e muTitan3Fuute terrorist o anrzation with AE i
Re'ndd which the hijackers are believed to be associated Their
?pnnci deman ou out the 'jacking was that Ku-
M0, t i I _4~_ -
_ wait release 17 mein rs o Al Dawa who were convicted
Iran. bomb! ngl: . cons the
ate in uwait a year ago..
But boiE u Herman and M
C
rb
the `Shultz
r
o
v said that
such an action would c t to to a Amer-
ican ic. upperman sugges uis the
Unit fates should retaliate against Iran with eco-
nomic weapons, "We could go into court in New York and
By TERENCE SMITH
WASHINGTON - For months Secretary of State tie up Iranian funds lx American banks," be said "That
George P. Shultz had been arguing. would provide some counter-terror theater, which is
that the time has come what we need in this case."
for the United .States to use military force to either pre- The best solution a ears or retaliate against international terrorism, The al-
Shultz Doctrine - pre-emption, n, be The ehe United other part
States s ha as
ternative he has said, is for the United States to become ~ ledcs
the "Hamlet of nations," endlessly wringing Its hands. onjEs an itsas teen abl eto a unt a number uterrorist
over whether and how to respond. th
ruur txraoic-speaxung terrorists hijacked a Kuwaiti
airliner with 1.61 people on board, isolated the Americans
and killed two of them solely because they were Amer-
icans. The incident seemed to underscore the dangers
facing the 77,032 American civilians who serve, their
country overseas. ? . ,
A rescue attempt seemed out of the question. The
United States has commando teams specially trained is
storming hijacked airliners and freeing host-
rea
- a aunst encan omats ?un erupt Bo to
and El va or, .among others.-Italy sco a notable
success two wee ago w en it rounded up a seven-man
Lebanese terrorist group that it said was planning an at-
tack
on the American Embassy in Rome.
But officials say It would 'require
SURF-
human intelligence to pre-empt a hiia are
doutg what we can;" a senior State Department official ,
said, "but there is no way to track every terrorist cell -
around the world."
Tehe
where the United States is still vilified >}s
to condition public opinion about terrorism than a the 14t cific prescription for cu
Satan." Even, more, some United States officials said
State p is alsoP?tryl. P with It. The Secretary of there was evidence that Iran was supporting to win a policy debate within the Ad-
Pporting the hijack. ministration,. which remains divided over the wisdom..
ers. .Any assault'force would have to'be massive to pro.. anal efficacy of using force against terrorism. Each new -
tect both the hostages and itself against counterattack, " incident adds force to his
In the end, the hijacking concluded without any di- . the field nited S t to and most er today to
rect American action, other than strong rhetoric and dip. using agree that h Unitedtas is closer Ada to
lomatic pressure applied through third countries, Two force than it has been before.
_-
and burned and there seemed to be little that the United
States would or could do abut it.. _ .
The Teheran hijacking illustrated- the difficult -i
choices that arise in attempting to implement the so- -
called Shultz Doctrine in a specific.instance. "There was
simply no practical way for the United States to use force
in this case," observed Robert Kupperman, a counter-
terrorism specialist at the Georgetown Center for Strate-
gic and International Studies. "Any rescue team we sent ,
in would have been killed along with the hostages." ? .
"This case demonstrated that'the Shultz Doctrine --
the use of force - is at best a selective tool that does not
apply in every instance," Mr. Kupperman said.
Another s ialist, William Colby, the former Direc
for oZentra Intelligence, a green but he does not believe
that the difficulties posed in the Kuwaiti hijacking neces. -.
sanly invalidate the Shultz Doctrine, "Don't rule It out "
he said. The moment will come when we want to use',-.
force. And when we do, the public will support it."
man said, "between being perceived as a paper tiger if
we do nothing, and being seen as terrorists ourselves if
we strike back in the wiring way. The correct answer lies.-.
somewhere in between."
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
STAT
 3
11,
ARTICLE -Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
011 PAGE 1o4 MIAMI HERALD
1+ December 1981
Westmoreland denies he put
ceiling .on troop strength.
By JOE STARITA
Herald Staff Writer
NEW YORK - At no time
during his four-year tenure as
commander of U.S. forces in
Vietnam, Gen. William Westmore-
land testified Monday, did he ever
impose a ceiling on enemy troop
strength or feel pressured into
putting a good face on the war's
progress.
To have Imposed a ceiling on
enemy strength, he said, would
have been "improper." He was
oblivious to any political heat, he
said, because "I tried to stay out of
the political channels."
As pointed out by CBS attorney
David Boles, however, much of
Westmoreland's testimony ap-
peared to contrast sharply with
numerous magazine and newspa-
per articles, statements made by
other military officials and the
findings of a 1976 House commit-
tee Investigation.
Whether a ceiling was imposed
and whether Westmoreland was
` ... To impose a
ceiling, that would have
disregarded
intelligence findings
would definitely have
been improper.'
Gen. William Westmoreland
ill-prepared to counter the ene-
my's devastating January 1968 Tet
Offensive.
Vigorously denying all of the
program's allegations, Westmore-
land sued CBS. He is the highest-
ranking U.S. public official ever to
file a libel suit.
Grilling Westmoreland during a
wide-ranging, five-hour cross-ex-
amination Monday, Boles asked
the 70-year-old, retired general at
one point whether he recalled a
under pressure to present good September 1967 meeting with
news about the war are issues atA, George Carver, the CIA's chief of
the heart of his $120 million libel Vietnamese affairs.
suit against CBS. Westmoreland said that.he . did.
In a January 1982 documentary recall that meeting.
entitled The Uncounted Enemy: A "He [Carver]inquired if a
Vietnam Deception, CBS said that ceiling had been imposed and I
Westmoreland : imposed ?a said it had : not," Westmoreland
300,000-man 'ceiling on enemy replied.
troop strengths even though his " ... To impose a ceiling that
own intelligence. staff believed the would have disregarded intelli-
number to be. much higher. - gence findings would definitely
He did so, the broadcast said, have been improper," the general
because he believed the only way said.
his request for more troops would Boles then produced a portion of
be granted was if he could show Carver's earlier trial testimony
that U.S. forces were winning the and read it aloud to the jury.
war. Carver's. recollection. of the
As a result, the program con- ' meeting, Boles said, included this
cluded, Westmoreland intentional- statement: "' .. His [Westmore-
ly deceived President Lyndon land's) subordinates were acting
Johnson about the true size of the under the impression that they
enemy and left American forces were under instructions to stay
below a certain overall figure or
ceiling.' "
Westmoreland said he assured
Carver during that meeting that'
there was no ceiling and no one in
his command was under any
pressure to stay within a certain
figure.
Under intense questioning from
Boies, Westmoreland said that he
did not learn that some officials in
his command believed they were
under orders to intentionally un-
derestimate enemy troop strengths
until he saw the CBS broadcast.
"I did learn after the CBS
broadcast ... that apparently
there were some officials at a low
level who apparently had an
erroneous impression in that re-
gard," Westmoreland said.
A number of those officials are
expected to testify for CBS later In
the trial.
Boies then asked Westmoreland
whether he recalled seeing a 1976
congressional report that also
questioned-the reliability of U.S.
military intelligence reports.
"I have no recollection of It, no,"
Westmoreland replied.
In a highly critical study of
enemy estimates provided by mili-
tary intelligence in the months
preceding the Tet Offensive, the
report, called the Pike Committee
Report, reached many of the same
conclusions that CBS did.
At one point, the report quotes
then-CIA Director William Colby,
who testified before the commit-
tee, saying: "Warning of the Tet
offensive-had not fully anticipated
the intensity, coordination and
timing of the enemy attack.'
Later, the report said: "The
validity of most of the numbers
was significantly dubious. Unfor-
tunately, they were relied on for
optimistic presentations."
/14
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
ABC ROOD ~"OFNING AMERICA
28 Nove^iber 1984
AA371FORMER CIAIHARTMAN: Eleven minutes after 7 right now. As we heard
(AGENT/ARREST 51on the news this morning, the FBI has arrested a former
CIA employee and charged him with being a spy. Carl
Koecher is his name. He faces a possible life sentence if
he's convicted of passing the national security
information to the Czechoslovakian intelligence service
not recently, but back in the mid- to early 1970s. Adm.
Stansfield Turner was director of the CIA after that time,
during the Carter administration. And he joins us this
morning from Washington. Good morning, admiral. TURNER:
Good morning, David.
HARTMAN: Two, two words that jumped out when reading
about this last night and this morning, he is described,
Mr. Koecher, as 'a contract employee of the CIA,' and,
also, 'an illegal spy.' Now, what is a contract employee?
And what is a (sic) illegal spy? ADM. STANSFIELD TURNER
(former director, CIA): Well, all kinds of people are
contract employees. Some of them make a contract to work
only maybe a day a year, some of them full-time, 365 days.
It's just a term for somebody who's not on the full Civil
Service payroll. It's not a very significant distinction.
HARTMAN: All right. TURNER: 'Illegal spies,' that's a
term the FBI uses to mean that the man, or person, was
illegally introduced into this country, originally.
Again, it's not a very important distinction. The...
HARTMAN: All right. Here is a man who has come here to
the United States, an emigrant. He's a naturalized
citizen. He's from another country and so forth. How
could he apparently, so easily, get access to top, what
appears to be top security information? TURNER: Well,
when you have somebody come over from another country and
be willing to check us, you check him as carefully as you
can. You check the information he brings with him to see
if it is valid. You use your own spies in his country to
find out if there is some background on this man that you
should know. You run tests on him. You surveille him to
see whether he's still in contact with people he should
not be in contact with. Sometimes, you get taken in.
David, it just happens in this case that this came at the
end of a long period of rather poor counterintelligence
work in the CIA. And in the middle of this man's time
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 STAT
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
WASHINGTON POST
21 November 1984
By Chuck Conconi
Washington Post Staff Writer
"Fulfilled my promise. The mayor of Ven-
ice, Italy, married Sally Shelton and me
today."-Former CIA director William E. Colby,
long distance from Venice yesterday
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
WASHINGTON POST
20 November 1984
Colby, Shelton to Marry
After all the speculation, close friends say
that former Barbados ambassador Sally
Shelton is scheduled to marry former CIA
director- William E. Colby in Venice today.
The couple had a pre-celebration luncheon
Friday with a'group of close friends here
before leaving for Italy. After the wedding,
the couple, both fluent in Italian, will spend
a few days in Italy before returning to
Washington. They will maintain residences
in both New York City, where Shelton is a
vice president of international economics at
Bankers Trust, and in Northwest Washing-
ton. Colby,has a law practice here. It is the
second marriage for both.
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
fi t. APP A EE
1.1.ASPINGTON TIAI!FS
8 November 1984
Madame Earie, just
recovering from sev-
eral weeks of
double-drill crystal-
gazing for Chuck Mannatt, is on
parade again this morning. Atten-
tion! Salute smartly! And speak!
Q: Madame Earle, I really miss
the Journalistic Jibes of Sally
Quinn, since she slid into seclu-
sion to become a Novelist, Mama
and Major Hostess. Is there
no-one left who's fancy enough for
her to write about?
A: Why, of course! Herself. She's
got a dear little Piece in the
current Architectural Digest, all
about How I Fixed Up Gray Gar-
dens, My House in East Hampton.
(The best bit: She had decorating
encouragement from Beyond
the Grave from Big Edie Beale, its
late owner.) Meanwhile, Sally's
also signed on to write a Piece for
House and Garden on How I Fixed
Up My $2.5 Million Georgetown
House. No word on whether the
late Todd Lincoln helped out with
the swatches and fixtures, dar-
lings, but Ms. Q's notably easier on
her self than on her earlier vic-
tims. We all mellow, of course.
Q: Except You, Madame Earie.
'Well, I'm waiting. When will Bill
Colby, former CIA chief, marry -
former Ambassador a y elton,
*Wose honeymoon cruise you ve
area ysoru e y ted?
ra t e wo , now, and
rejoice. T e ate or t e ormal
latching is November 21.
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
STAT
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
WRt11NGTON POST
6 November 1984
W ;SFU GTON WAYS
.M., 111.1 MVZMM
By Donnie Radcliffe
Washington Post Staff Writer
"I beg your pardon?" sputtered a
Central Intelligence Agency
spokeswoman at the agency's
Langley headquarters when asked
about a cocktail circuit
report-planted no doubt by the
KGB-that Director William
Casey and his wife, Sophia,
recently had been divorced and
that he had married a former
American ambassador to a
Caribbean country.
"Director Casey is still very
happily married," said the
spokeswoman who, after
recovering her cool, suggested
that the bridegroom ui question
might be a former director,
namely William Colby.
Co*, however, said it is not he
who has untied one nuptial knot
and tied another.
Siunply put, Colby said: T m* not
yet married because I'm not yet
divorced."
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
 Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6
tiJJVULAI D r=ib
30 October 1984
POLITICAL BRIEFS
COLUMBUS, OHIO
President Reagan is opposed to a nuclear freeze now but might be more
flexible on the issue after winning re-election, former CIA Director William
Colby predicted Tuesday.
Colby, a veteran intelligence officer who was CIA chief from 1973-76,
acknowledged at a news conference that Reagan "at the moment" opposes a freeze
on the development of nuclear weapons.
"He also, however, is very much interested in some kind of progress on
nuclear reduction and so forth. And I think after the election, when he will be
looking more to the history books than the hustings, I think he's going to want
very much to have some serious achievement on his record of an agreement with
the Soviets," Colby said.
"And I frankly think the freeze is the easiest thing even to start with," he
said.
Approved For Release 2008/04/28: CIA-RDP91-00901 R000500060004-6