'COVERT' MEANS 'LAST RESORT'

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000505290045-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 2, 2010
• Sequence Number: 45
• Publication Date: May 31, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/02 : CIA-RDP90-0055
kR2I CL AY:i.:ukL=
o3 TL Z
'WAS'-TNC T C?N ?CST
31 Iv' t, 1963
Philip Gevelin
`Covert' Means `fast Resort'
In the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs
debacle tr, 19c1. President Kennedy
wanteu a postmortem from someone in
tie V nick i-iou'e whf, had not, been di-
recti\ involved; so he asked Wait Ros-
tow for a recapitulation of how it went-
so wrong.
The repo: was secret. But I recall
t_'what- Rostoat-to',d me was his
inoe}ibv
bottom L-ne. leaving aside the execu-
Lion or ~be~persLion -be t~~c+uglit =it i
oniv fair to bear in mind that "the CIA
onfy?gets terminal cases' when conven-
tiona means have failed. The CIA was
being asked to undo covertiv=hat.he
poiictimalers on high had been unable
to prevent ove-iy. for whatever rea-
sons-- Mac's of foresight. ideological
hang-ups: domestic political inhibi-
Lions: clumsy dir,iomac\? a mistrust of
si>c t7c tenusl of umeiv foreign aid.
Roses ws rule u` last resort gok-_ to the
hear, of the c n rent controversy over the
Reamn ac-ninictration`s Central Amer-
)Can pulp as it is nicely laid out in as re-
cant report nv the House Permanent Se-
the Campiatnn.of some
c,- .: a;no would have preferred a mish.
mash of birert sap compromise, the
fence bf this -reap, Kin the Teh eshin?
parry-line Drecision with which the issue
is ioined Tat nine Democratic wmrnit-
tee members tel why. they voted to end
cover,, CIA suppor, to tnsurgenL lorces
inside Nicara_~tta. wfiue voting an extra
.:i miliion in over, help to l ionduras
money E Salvador. T#he oney .Would
mostly be for building barriers and
in- radar. sensors and other Pophis-
ucated eouipment to choke off Nicara-
's supply Imes to the Wrist repels .in
> l Salvador The f re Republicans tell
wh> they think this approach would
grveiy undercut the Reagan policy,
The argument was over means, how-
ever. not ends. The importance of'. El
Salvador's salvation from mmTnkmism
is Laden as a given. So istile Mamx Leninist menace from Nicaragua- The
E1 Salvador insurgency "depends for
its lifeblood ... ups
from Nicaragua and Cuba," the Demo-
cratic maiorin? freely concedes.
At.this point we confront Rostov s
Rule: the bommittee Republicans would
turn the patient over to the CIA for cov-
ert treatment They are careful to argue
,d distinction- between covertly aiding
Nicaraguan insurgents for the purpose of
"interdicting" supplies to E Salvador
(v&kb :,s ell the -current. law permits)
and acuigy_ contributing to the insur-
gess,aprodaimed purpose Hof overthrow- .
ing#bt-go rnment in Managua
- But-tite-minoritv-membersspeak of
"attempting to -disarm or neutralize
Ni us" in 2 way that -.unmasks
tbeu- Und-R,onald .Reagan's) real -be-
sign to undo the -past by replacing the
Santfinista-regrme with one 'more con
genial to U.S. interests. It is;-with ap-
prWrlate .modification, the "tray of .
PAgi'-ZUatalitv.at work.
The meiority argument. quite sim-
ork. The CIA
ple, is that this won't work.*
will be "inti t" by being asked to "con-
tinue an action whose principal eie-
-a are known,to all the world." And
this common knowledge will fuel hos-
tile propaganda in a hemisphere with
long memories of heavy-handed and
imperious'Yanqui intervention.
More important. if the administra-
tion's own cries of alarm are to be
taken seriously, the year-long "inter-
diction" mission has failed: when it fits
the administration argument of the
-moment., we.are told that El Salvador
is endangered by an ever increasing
flow of supplies from Nicaragua.
The administration (and the com-
mittee Republicans) would also have
us believe that inciting insurgency in
Nicaragua will turn the Sandinista
government inward in its own defense,
'discourage external adventurism, en-
courage a willingness to negotiate. To
which the committee Democrats re-
spond that the results have been just
-the opposite:
"inflicting a bloody nose on nations
-.achieves a purpose no different with
nations than with individuals. It tends
to instill a deep desire to return the
Ivor:-The Sandinistas are no different..
Their?poiicies have not softened. They
have Mvdened." -
What's more, a U.S.-supported
Nicaraguan insurgency actually "tends
to bind the Nicaraguan population
.even those with Ii We enthusiasm for'
the Sandinistas-together against the
threat of attack."
The Democrats argue that -their
open approach -is the best-way to show.
U.S. determination and commitment.
The Republican answer reads like a,'
declaration of bankruptcy*. "With the stakes-so high and with the uncertainty
of US. -resolve, the governments in -
Central America would be unwilling to
work -with us it,, the over, program to
reduce the flow of external support. zo
the Salvadoran guerrillas."
If that's so-if our friends won't
work openly With us in their own de-
fense--ther, the U.S. position may be
so weak that it cannot be salvaged by
either overt or coven means But
oven-versus-cove-is nonetheless what.
the current debate is all about- And
Rostow's Rule is an apt reminder that.
when you are talking "covers" you are
talkin? ,last resom
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/09/02 : CIA-RDP90-00552R000505290045-3