INTELLIGENCE QUESTIONS RAISED IN MOSCOW

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: Library of Congress
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
• Release Decision: RIPLIM
• Original Classification: T
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: January 11, 2017
• Document Release Date: January 4, 2013
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: April 10, 1974
• Content Type: MEMO

~:? c~,~~
No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
~,: Complctel Outside S stern
MP.At(~RANDUbt
MORI/CDF
002379399
-- The Soviet claim that a U5 ICBM was tested carrying;
5 RVs and that POSEIDON carries 12 RVs.
NATIONAL SLCU1t1T1' COUNCIL
TOP SECRET/SENSITIVT~'/CODE~VORD April 10, 197~k
MEMORANDUM FOR: SECRETARY I{ISSINGER
~~ "J I
FROM? JAN M. LODAI~%HELMUT SONNENI'ELD
SUBJECT: Intelligence Questions Raised in Moscovc-
As you recall, there were a number of questions raised in the Moscow
discussions on which the Soviets appeared to be confused or perhaps
were intending to mislead us. Among these were;
-- Whether the new Soviet ICBMs are really new missiles
or merely modifications of older systems.
-- The Soviet claim that none of their ICBMs carry more
than. three R.Vs.
~- The Soviet references to their "160" bonnbcrs.
We have xeviewed the Soviet claims with the Antelligence catnmunil.y and
DOD. The Ivey conclusions of our review are discussed bolow.
1. Are the new Soviet ICBMs reall new missiles ar m~~t?c~l~
modifications of existin s sterns?
This question arose when Brezhnev indicated that all of the "nc~w"
Soviet ICBMs are really just rnodificatians of existing tni:~::il~?:c. /1 t.
one point, }1e even said "new" ICF3Ms would violate L1te Inl.c~rir? ,
Agreement.
On this point, we suspect that 13rer.I~nev confused rte.w ICl~nt:; ~ti?itl-
thew IC}3M launchci?s, (tl~e construction of wliicli would vic~l;-t~? tl~~?
Interim .tlg;rcement). It is tlic Savicts existing; ICIiM }aurtc~lrc?r?:c Ili,~l
are being rnodificd to accept their new missiles.
We also asked CIA to evaluate whether t}t.c new ICI;Ms cnul~l ~?~~~~, ~'''?'~'~'~Y
be rnoclifications of existinb missiles.
TOP S}~~CI2T:TI~I:NSITIVr/CO}]T;~VOIZD
OSD Review
Completed
No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
 No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
 'I No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6 ~ `~
O
Yau may.wish to consider xaisiix~ this point in your talks with Gramylco
aii the off. charicc Elaat= the Soviet military has dcliberatcl.y misled. the
leadership. _. -.- -
- .: . Z. Do the 5o~ret TCTIMs ?carry rnorc than' 3 R Vs?
Brezhnev asserted an,se~exal occasions that his ICBMs have zio`more
- than 3 RVs (though at one point he indicated. the possibility of up to 5).
TC7P SI;CItET/crNSITIVF./COI~]~,~VOltn
? No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
 ? TdP SI~CRT;T/ST:NSITIVI;/COI7T;ti'~ORD
No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
~_~
:,;,s'' It is at least possible that 13rezhncv was gemiiricly confused on the
BtXbjGCt.. Perhaps lzc was referring to e~:isi:iSlg .MR.V systems such: a,s
_` the SS~11~IvTOD 3 now be.ng.c:ttezzsivcly deployed, ox possibly he. had
_ been poorly briefed. (You will recall last, year at Zavidavo, z3rezhnev
claimed,_eiglzt tivarheads far,.his. new heavy missile which has not been.
proven out,) ?
Beyond sinnplc confusion, or a deliberate Saeiet attemgt.to mislead us,
(which ,could. rzr~t possibly: succeed), we can. find rxo plausible explana-
tion for the Savict statements.
3.. Soviet Claims About US MIR Vs .. -
A.t one point Brezhnev claimed the US had tested an IGBM with ?ive
MIR.Vs; at another paint he claizxied Paseidan carried twelve R.Vs.
n
Un the two 1G que s is ,
~~ie-Ll as never aunt a an wz~ ive R.Vs. In the weeks prior
to your Moscow visit the US launched three ICBMs, including:
..a A 1L~inutc.-nar. IT carrying the Emergency RUCk~4 Curntzlunica~
tions Systexxi and no reentry vehicle. The missile failed and
was destroyed in flight.
A Thor racket placing a weather satt?llite in orbit.
An Atlas xoclcet which launched a single maneuvering
reentry vehicle.
Done of these vehicles could lausibl have loolced like five RVs to the
I
This apparently is sta]1C11rd Soviet practice in monitoring our missile
tests, 11s we surtzzisc il, the Soviet approach to monitoring our ICBMs
xelies heavily aiz U5 open source literature far much of their intelligence
data; they apparently monitor our tests with trawlers to confirm that
things arc pretty much as c~.pected. Iiz fact, if we sccrctllr prepared and
tested an ICIiI\~[ ~vitlz flue RVs flit ,Savic~l s woulcl prol?.l~ly never know it.
T4P SI~.CI:E7'/.ST:N,SI'1'IVI:/COI~r;~V012D
?- -~-~--~ No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
 0
'1 Vt~ :71au1t1'~ .L/ ~~l'.1V71 t t V 1:. (VUU1S VV V1t 1J
No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6
,~
In sum, we can find no plausible explanation fox the Soviet claim.
Qn the Poseidon question, we can identify sarrle indications of how the
Soviets might have concluded that Poseidon carries twelve RVs. For
example, early litcratuxe an Poseidon included reference to a confi~xra-
tion of twelve FtVs, plus a penetration aids package. On the other hand,
Foseidon has Hover actually been tested with twelve RVs, Poseidon can
actually carry up to fourteen RVs and it is routinely tested in the mode --
the xrlost recent fourteen R V test was in January -~ and is also tested
with payloads of ten and si.~ RVs. These are the three basic payload
con?igurGtians that we have actually deployed. As actually deployed,
Poseidon has an average of ten R.Vs permissile; same Poseidans are '
deployed with fauxtcen.
From a SALT standpoint, we have usually counted Poseidon as carrying
ten RVs. On the other hand, the Soviets would be justified in trying to
credit it with its maximum tested payload, i, e. fourteen R Vs. (This
tends to make the possibility of a deal based on RVs less attractive from
the US standpoint since our 50~ Poseidons could theoretically carry
?, 0~0 RVs, )
0
4. Soviet References to Their "1G0~" Bomber - Brezhnev offered
oxt several occasions to trade their contemplated "160" bomber for our
is -1.
TOP SP;CI2T:7'/CI~:NSITIVI~a /COI71~.1V0]ZI7
No Objection to Declassification in Part 2013/01/04 : LOC-HAK-545-17-2-6 ~-----