SUB ACCUSATION CALLED BASELESS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 62
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 9, 2001
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: August 17, 1972
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved For Release 2001/03/p4 : CIA-RDP80-0160
OARDEN CITY, N.Y.
NEWSDAY
E. ? 427,270
AUG 1 71972
"Sub Accusation
Called Baseless
, Sen. J Williaiii Fulbright
(D-Ark.), chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, said yeSterday
he was persuaded that there
was "no basis for charges that
the Russians lied" to Presi-
dent Nixon. during ner.patia-
tiong on the interim U.S.-
Soviet missile freeze.
Nevertheless, Sen. Henry
? M. Jackson (D-Wash.) said:
he was sticking by his charge
that the Soviets lied by say-
ing they had 48 missile-firing
Sfibmarines under construc-
tion rather than 41 to 43.
-Fulbright told newsmen it
was. clear, from the briefing
the n t r al , Intelligence
Agencxmgave his committee-
and froth an administration
disclosure of May 26, that
the two countries have differ,
ent interpretations of what
? constitutes a submarine, under .
construction.
.!! Meanwhile, t. h e House
iiostpcined it expect61 ap-
plroval of the five-year- agrc11-
itZent until tonight.
STAYOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03/04 CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved For Release 200.1/03/04 : CIA-RDP8001601R00
PHILADELPHIA; PA.
INQUIRER
M - 463,503
1 S - 867,810
AUG 17 1972
V.iraohington Dateline
.,.?,
STATOTHR
id Soviets 'Lie' to Nixon?
Pulbright Plans Probe
J. W. Fulbright (D.; Ark.) has ordered an inquiry
into Sen. Henry M. Jackson's allegation that the Russians.
"lied to President Nixon" in the final
, SALT negotiations in Moscow.
Fulbright, chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, di-
rected the committee staff to question
the Central Intelligence Agency about
ll'intpt511nkttti-ire'vsketi-Mr. Nixon
for an explanation or denial.
.Jackson (D., Wash.) injected the
allegation into the "debate over the
U. S.-Soviet interim agreement on of-
fensive weapons and his amendment
urging the United States to seek
Sen. Fulbright
equality with the Soviet Union in
any future permanent agreement.
Senate Democratic Leader Mike
IVIansfield (Mont.) said he did not think the 'President was
bainboozled or taken in at Moscow. Mansfield said he was
artain Mr. Nixon and his principal advisers?Henry A. Kis-
: 'singer and Gerard Smith .w.pre aware of what they were ?
doing,"
-
Approved For Release 2001/03/04 :.CIA7RDP60-01601R001400170001-1
WASHINGTON POST
Approved For Release 2001/03/OA ? CIA-RDP80-016
I 7 MUG We.
.?
SALT Pact schedule 8n The House r behind on U.S
hedule yesterday and post-
,
ported debate on the arms
agreement. Today the House
Hits New is scheduled to take up a con-
troversial ?measure .involving
the busing of schoolchild-
.
S
-DI
L; Ten, and it may not reach the
iL
arms agreement until Friday.
No progress was. reported by
Senate leaders on reaching an
. By Jack Fuller
Washington Post Staff Writer
Chances dimmed yesterdayi?
for President Nixon to have a l
package of arms limitation'
agteements ratified by Con-:
gress to take to the Repub-
lican convention next week.
The House unexpectedly de-
layed its scheduled debate On i
th e U.S.-Russian offensive!
weapons pact, while Senate
disagreement over when and
how to .stop debate on amend-
ments to the agreement con-
tinued to prevent any vote on
the matter.
Meanwhile, the Senate For-
eign Relations Committee met
behind closed doors to ques-
tion government intelligence
experts about a charge that
the. Rasians had lied to the
United States during the nego-
tiations that led to the agree-
ment.. ?
Committee Chairman .1:' Fulbright (D-Ark.) said after ?
CIA briefing there is "no basis
for charges that. the Russians
lied." ?
Sen. Henry M. Jackson (I):
Wash.), whose amendment to.
the 'agreement has precipitated
the extended debate, said
Tuesday that he had. "intelli-
gence" information that the
Russians have only 42 Y?class
submarines deployed or under
construction; though they had
claimed to have. 48.
Majority Leader Mike Mans-
field (D-Mont.) urged Jackson
to back up his . charge and,
urged the Nixon administra-
tion to present its side of the'
story.
"I don't believe the Presi-
dent was bamboozled or taken
in by the Russians;" Mansfield,
said.
? Administration officials be-
fore the agreement was signed'
noted publicly the discrepancy ?
between the Russian and U.S.
estimates of Soviet submarine
strength, and attributed it to a
disagreement about the defini-
tion of "under construction."
agreement to end debate, and.
Minority Leader liugh Scott
. (R-Pa.) said there appeared to
be a "movement to prevent
the Senate front voting."
Jackson's amendment would
urge the President. to seek ?
"cquality of offensive weap-
ons beween the U.S. and Soy.
viet Unioii .in the second
round of arms talks:*
STATOTHR ?
Approved For Release 2001/03/04 : CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
STATOTHR
- 12820 Approved For Rkkaalwa00111004mglAttBD-PNAW1R0014
for the dikes. It doesn't take a Phila-
delphia lawyer to label this policy for
What it is--a policy of deliberately bomb-
ing dikes. If the direct result of bombing
a target beside a dike is that bombs- will
inevitably hit the dike, then the dike is
being bombed as deliberately as if the
dike itself were the target.
And so I urge the administration to
recognize the drastic implication of its
policy, and to take immediate action to
prevent any destruction of the dikes of
North Vietnam. Surely, in the name of
decency, the military priorities of the
administration and its policy of massive
bombing must yield to the simple human
fact that countless innocent lives are be-
ing jeopardized when the dikes are
bombed. Surely, in its unseemly zeal to
bbinb the North into a settlement of the
war before election day, the administra-
tion can at least pull back from the-awful
brink of destruction and spare the dikes.
Surely, America, can forgo the destruc-
tion of a military target if it means the
Safety of a dike.
One more point should be made. The
Issue of the bombing of the dikes has be-
come a cause of legitimate and substan-
tial concern throughout the world. The
allegations about the dikes are clearly
rarSing new and increasingly. serious
doubts in the international community
about- America's role in Vietnam. Per-
haps the most ominous aspect of the con-
troversy, apart from the enormous ques-
tion of the validity of the allegations be-
ing made,. is the extremely hostile, de-
fellSiVe and increasingly isolated posture
the President has adopted in seeking to
rebut the charges.
The latest. incident was the President's
news conference last week, in which be
labeled the Secretary General of the
United Nations as naive and tf dupe of
Hanoi for daring to raise the question of
the dikes, Mr. Waldheim is a. distin-
guished and respected diplomat who has
the; confidence of all the member nations
of the United Nations. I deeply regret the
desperate ad hominem attack he has
now suffered at the hands of the admini-
stration for speaking out of conscience
on what has already become one of the
great moral issues of the war. The proper
stance of the administration on the issue
Is to deal on the merits with the- ques-
tions about the dikes, not to attack those
who raise the issue.
Incidents like this demonstrate why
the Se.nate resolution introduced today
come-s at such an important time. The
Senate has its own responsibility to help
resolve the issue of the dikes. It is
my hope that the serious questions now
outstanding about our policy will be an-
swered at once, so that the conscience of
America can be cleared, at least on this
new and ominous aspect of the war.
What is at stake .here is not simply the
outcome of the war, but the judgment of
?history on the (talons of the United
States against a tiny Asian nation.,
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I am
delighted to be a cosponsor of the resolu-
tion putting the Senate firmly on record
In opposition to the bombing of the dikes
in North Vietnam.
It is almost impossible to determine
with any accuracy what damage our
planes are causing the dikes. On the one
hand we have the sort of denial I received
from the Defense Department on July
19 indicating that, and I quote:
The remote possibility exIsts that in our
bombing of . . . military targets minor dam-
age may have occurred to dikeS or small irri-
gation clams.
On the other hand we have accusations
by the North Vietnamese that we are de-
liberately bombing a great number of
dikes.
The truth undoubtedly, lies somewhere
in between.
I am quite sure that we are not en-
gaged in a systematic attempt to destroy
the dikes in the North. As this resolu-
tion makes clear, the President stated on
June 29 that this was against American
Policy.
However, at, a lime when a ranking offi-
cer in South Vietnam, General Lavelle,
can conduct unauthorized bombing raids
and receive no more -than a gentle slap
on the wrist, it is entirely possible, even
probable, that individuals charged with
flying sorties might find it in accordance
with their concept of national policy to
take a few runs at the dikes.
This is why I believe today's resolution
is so important. It not only makes it clear
to our friends around the world who are
understandable upset by the recent,
charges that tile Senate does not condone
attacks on North Vietnam's dike system.
It also serves to discourage American
airmen from taking steps that they- may
mistakenly feel are ill our national in-
terest, despite our official posture.
I am hopeful that the Senate can act
quickly- to implement this resolution. -
I ask unanimous consent that my letter
to Secretary of Defense Laird on this
issue as well as the Defense Departinent's
response be printed in the Ri2COR.D.
There being no objection, the items
were orderer. to be printed in the E.Econn,
as follows:
JurrE 27, 1972.
The Honorable MELvIN LAIRD,
Secretary of Defense, The Pentagon, Weah-
ington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SLCRETARY : The New York Times
for June 2G, 1972 carries a piece by Anthony
Lewis raising the question of whether or not
the United States is now bombing the dikes
in. North Vietnam.
Mr. Lewis cites the President's statement
in 'April saying that it was something we
wanted to avoid and that it was not needed.
He also cites. a number of specific public
statements, two of them by non-Vietnam
sources asserting that the dikes have been
bombed. One charged that 'one of the dikes
?was completely cut" and another asserted
that "Without doubt there is now systematic
bombing of the dikes."
Mr. Lewis states that no one should douh-t
what bombing the dikes might mean. "It
would bring into play, justifiably for once,
that much ab.used word genocide.-
I am writing to you to ask for a specific
straightforward, =hedged, and unqualified
statement by you as to the facts.
Has the U.S. bombed any of the dikes?
'Is the U.S. systematically bombing the
dikes?
If we are not bombing the dikes, would
you cite the specific detailed orders which
were given not to bomb them.
If we are bombing the dikes would you
cite the specific authority under which you
or the President specifically authorized the
bombing.
We need an explicit statement of the facts
and our policy now.
I would appreciate an immedite reply. lf
we are bombing, Congress and the U.S. pub-
lic need to know it. If we arc not, that
should be made public in order to forestall
charges which have no basis In fact.
(1/11 enclosing Mr. Lewis' article.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
WILLIAM PROXMIRE,
U.S. Senator.
ASSISTANT SECETARY OF DEFENSE,
Washington, D.C., July 19, 1O2.
II011. WILLIAM PROXMIRE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAF: SENATOR PROXMIRE: Secretary Laird
has asked me to reply to your letter of June
27; 1972, concerning the alleged bombing of
the dikes in North Vietnam by the United
States,
The United States has exercised great
restraint in our current bombing of North
Vietnam. The US is not targeting dikes or
dams in North Vibtnam. Since some military
targets, such as bridges and anti-aircraft
artillery and missile sites are sometimes near
dikes or dams, the remote possibility cidsts
that in our bombing of these military Isn't La
minor damage may have occurred to diees
or small irrigation dams. Some enemy
anti-
aircraft sites have been placed on or bear
dikes and our pilots have the authority. a ad
the inherent right of self-protection, to at-
tack such sites In self-defense. Furthermore,
there is an obvious posaibility of clainaec to
dikes or irrigation dam; from North Viet-
namese &kids, downed MIGs or anti-aircraft
shells falling back to earth,
It is quite clear that the North Vietnam-
ese are conducting a worldwide. propaganda
campaign falsely alleging that the Uiaited
States is systematically bombing their dike
system. No doubt the United States will be
blamed by North Vietnam for any and all
damages to the dike system over the next
few months.
In fact, floods occurred last year in North
Vietnam in- the absence of bombing partiel-
ly because of the generally poor sta.ae 01
maintenance of the water conservancy sys-
tem. Furthermore, the following warnins". on
the neglected state of the system appeared
In the official North Vietnamese newapaper,
Hanoi Moi, on July 20, 1972:
"In some places the repair of the dike
portions that were damaged by torrential
rains. in 1971 11as not yet met technical re-
quirements. A number of thin and
cued dikes v,-hich are probably full of tern-Lite
colonies and holes have not yet been de-
tected for repair. Therefore, cadres and peo-
ple in the capital must absolutely not be
subjective: Let each individual, locality and
unit actively participate in the present dike-
strengthening movement; especially in Min-
ing and sondfying the Important portion
of dikes. There Is not much time before the
torrential rain season."
These facts should set the record straight
on our actual bombing policies and North
Vietnamese allegations.
Sincerely,
DENNIS J. DOOLIN.
-SENATE RESOLUTION 343?SUBMIS-
SION OF A RESOLUTION RELAT-
ING TO BRIEFINGS ON SIVATEGIC
ARMS LIMITATION TO MEMBERS
OF THE SENATE
(Referred to the Committee on For-
eign Relations.)
Mr. ROTH (for himself, Mr. Coors.c,
and Mr. Boscs) submitted the following
resolution:
Approved For Release 2001/03/04 : CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
?
1013.1 Ji MES
Approved For Release 200M3184:189A-R
118, ISSUES'EPOR
TOREBUTCHARGES
ON DIKE KIES
Intelligence Document Says
Hits Were Unintentional
'and Damage Was Minor
By BERNARD GWERTZMAN
Special .to The Neva York T.rnes
WASHINGTON, July 28?
The Administration today re-
leased a Government intela
. ligence- report finding that
American bombing had dam-
aged North Vietnam's dike sys-
tem at 12 points, But the report
. concluded, that the hits were
unintentional, their impact was
minor "and no major dike has
been breached."
The eight-page report, put to-
ether largely by the Central
"Intelligence Agency, was given
? Text of State Department's
report is on Page 2.
newsmen by the State Depart-
ment to buttress the Adminis-
tration's contention that North
Vietnam was falsely charging
the United States with bomb-
ing the dikes systematically
and deliberately.
"Photographic- evidence
shows. conclusively that there
has been no intentional bomb-
ing Of the dikes," the report
said. The photographs were
taken on July 10 and 11, a
State Department official said.
Later photos were not avail-
able, the official said, because
, ?
reconnaissance flights by the
United States Air Force were
hampered by cloud conditions
over the Red River Delta area
in which the extensive 2,700-
mile network of dikes and dams
is centered.'
.[In the dispute between -
President Nixon and Secre-
tary General Waldheim over
bombing of dikes, the Secre-
tary General called in George
Bush, the United States dele-
gate. Their conversation,
while not described publicly,
dealt with Mr. Nixon's charge
thatrtstilk4d lfabieR
"taken In oy Hanoi s asser-
tions. And in South Dakota,
Senator George McGovern at-
...
serted . that Mr. Nixon had
"stooped beneath the dignity
of his office" in his news-
conference comments on
bombing. Pages 2 and 10.1_
'The intelligence report made
public today declared "Photo-
graphic evidence shows con-
clusively that there has been
no intentional bombing of the
dikes." The pictures on which
the findings were based were
taken on July 10 and 11, a State
Department official said.
Later photos were not avail- ? -
able, the official said, because Although the report was
based on photographer recon-
reconnaissance flights by the naissance, the State Department
United States Air Force were' retfused ? to show newmen any
hampered by cloud conditions of the photographic evidence. A
over the Red River Delta area, detparunent official said that it
in which the extensive, 2,700-
was decided today not to issue
the photograph because it was
mile network of dikes and dams
is centered. felt by the Administration that
The report also said that all this, would only provoke North
isuc its own tietnam o
the dike damage occurred with- V some of
photo-
in close range of "specific tar- graphs in 'rebuttal:
gets of military value." which might be "fabricated."
"Of the 12 locations where This report, including the
damage has occurred, 10 are photographs, prepared earlier
and presented ? on Monday . to
close to identified individual
targets such as
petroleum stor. Kurt Waldheim, secretary gen-
age facilities, and the other two cral of the United Nations, by
are adjacent to road and river George Bush, the United States
Zelegate. Mr. Waldheim had said
transport lines," the report s.
It said that because a large he had unofficial incormation
number of ? the dikes serve as that the United States was
-the bombing the dikes.
Hi bases for roadways,
Yesterday, at his news con-
ference, President Nixon force-
fully denied Hanoi's charges
about a? systematic'. bombing
campaign against the dikes and
said that Mr. Waldheim- and
maze they create throughout
the delta makes it almest in-
evitable that air attacks direct-
ed against transportation .tar-
gets cause scattered damage to
dikes."
The report said that the bomb other well-intentioned and naive
craters identified by photo- people" had been "taken in" by
graphic reconnaissance at the Hanoi's propaganda. ? man of the
12 locations "can be repaired Mr. Nixon conceded, as have Committete,
easily with a minimum of labor
and equipment?a crew of less
than 50 men with wheelbar-
rows and hand tools could re-
pair in a day the largest crater
observed."
.'Repairs to all the dikes
could be completed within a
,week," it said. e
STATOTHR
Foreign Relations
was briefed along
other spokeEmen, that there had with other Senators by the
been some damage to the dikes
by accidental hits. Today North
Vietnam's radio retpeatn1 that
"Nixon has intentionally . at-
tacked the dike network- in
North Vietnam in line With all to support the view that thti
his wicked and barbarous plans. dike damage was near military
Senator J. W. Fulbright, chair- targets.
C. I. A., a few days ago. He said
today that he had no quarrel
with the conclusion of the re-
port: He said that the photo
evidence_he was shown seemed
lease 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
ApproveggGoetme-2001103/04 : CIA-RDP80-0160
NEWS
E - 434,849
,5111, 22 i
STATOTHR
iyTV 1.: 'T4 "1-1
LJ. 4J;I-)
L.)
?.,i
i - ,'
v`71,
'r,,L.,[.:;
"! ,,!
.L-':,,,,,,4,(:-:,,, JL ji
?r''''' ,I.
','.' ,t ?;
(-I
,--;,i:
By William AleGaltin 1 the chairman, has never stated i agreemems and the ne,,k., \yea- I
Of Our V;Toshington 13yrecat 1
, publicly that he, too, would i pens projects, that ct?ch .stood 1
I recommend against adoption I on its o',vn merits.
I of i he agreements ender those Finally, j)e, said Laird wits 1
i
circumstances. Dot he has spin g as defense secretary. I
backed up Laird's argument but he never did say \yliether i
tha:. the Trick:at submarine ha also as speaking for the i
and the 11-I bemb!.a: are vital President, i
to national security.
i
;
t-. II' `,'. ,,'.1.;,,'I
'T.V3.-0,-T''-?`: (.71 7:- ,-;r,,, '; ,,,,,-',,,) tri-P, 1
', ', "1 :, , z----
k....l
i
1
WASHINGTON ? Suspicion
is growing, here hat Def,7?nse
Sec. Melvin R. I and is speali-
ing for the Joint Chiefs of
Staff when he links the Moscow
arms liroiton. agreements
and bk7, spending on new ?n-
clear eapons sy:;terns.
Whether Laird a so is speak-
ing for Presidrqlt Nixon is
something that White flousa
correspondents have failed to
pin down they have
tried for ONT. C' days in a row to
get the answer Ott of RoAald
Ziegler, White House press
secretary.
When Laird appears on Capi-
- tol Hill to repeat what he origi-
nally stated June 6?that It
Iv 0 U I d recommend aF;ainst
adoption of the /vlosco.w agree.
merits if Congress failed. to
S upport administration
requests for big increases in
spending on a new missile sub-
marine and a new manned
bomber he always is accom-
panied by the chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Adm. Thomas IL Moorer,
SOME OF the sharpest criti-
THE CHIEFS, as President cism Laird has encountered in I
Nixon told COngre!-;S. "unani- his 31A years as deiense seem- l
i mously" approved the arms tary was voiced Wednesday 1
I, Forei:-..,.n Relations Com- 1
limitation ,agreements. But when he 1.0f:tit-Jai beunrc the I
their price for this, it is be- Senate
1 neVed, is administration pros-- mince.
1
I sure on C0111-0S,S .to win ap-- I Sen. j. William Pulbright '
proval DI the new weapons ( 0-Ari..), committee chair-.;
i funding. man, accused Laird of using i
When Ziegler was pressed on "scare tactics" and -rnis- ;
the question of whether Laird information" to try to win con- i
was speaking for the Presi- gressional approval of the t
dent, he said this was a li2,!... stepped up spending on \yea-
pathetic:al cuestion.. Tbis was pas. i
so, he said, because the Presi- Laird lied done the same
dent expects Congress to zip- thing in 1969, Fulbright
prove the Moscow. agreements charged, when he "scared" I
and to approve the defense Congress into appropriating 1
budget as well. money for an anti-ballistic
He then observed that. Presi- missile system. Laird's argu-
denim). assistant Henry Nis- I ment then, that this was neces-
singer had stated at the brief- l sary to counter a Russian first-
ing for hey congressmen that -1 strike threat, was discounted
there was no link between the I by the Central Intellig,ence
Agency, Fulbright asserted.
I Laird denied this.
-,
I Fulbright observed the corn-
4 mittee had an executive ses-
sion Tuesday with CIA,Threc-
Aor Richard ilelmrand that
:Aire intelligenca information he
t
Isupplied did not jibe with that i
provided by Laird.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
WASHINGTON l'OST
/a- Approved For Release 2001/0%1404U.NCWRDP80-0160
Activities
in
Congress
? , TODAY
Senate
Meets at 9 a.m.
Committees:
Armed Services-10 a.m. Open: Mili-
tary Implications Of SALT agreements.
Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird;
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
Adm. Moore; Paul Nilze, Department of
Defense. 1114 New Bldg,
Banking-10 P.m. Open: $3373, Improve
techniques In federally assisted housing
And $3654, Davis-Bacon provision aPPlic-
able to federally assisted housing. 5302
New Bldg.
Labor and Public Welfare Subcomte-
9:30 a.m. Open: Role of land grant col-
leges. Earl Butz, Secretary of Agricul-
ture; Tony Enchant, National Farmers
Union. 1202 Now Bldg..
Judiciary Subcomte-9:30 em. Open:
Financing inshtulions and mortgage com-
panies. G. R. Orsi, Century Federal
Savings and Loan, N.Y.; Frsnk Cheese-
man, City and County Savings, N.Y.;
John Haskell, Oneida Savings Bank,
N.Y.; Warren Light, united institutional
Servicing Corp., N.Y. 2223 New
et Public Works Subcomte-10 a.m. Open:
Omnibus river and haroor flood control
legislation. Army witns. .1200 New Bidg.
iulon Subcomte-10 urn. Open: $3231,
senatorial travel expenses. 301 Old Bldg.
D.C. Subcomle-9:10 a.m. Open: 52693,
create District of Cournbia Youth Com-
. Mission. Bernard Nordlinoer, D.C. Bar
Assoc., Frederick Vinson, immediate past
Pres.; Frederick- Ballard, juvenile de-
linquency committee; Charles Bryant,
Health and Welfare Council; Father Mc-
Carthy, Assumption Church. 6226 New
Bldg.
Commerce-10 a.m. Exec.: Cornt0 but.
ness. 5112 New Bldg.
Foreign Relations ? 10 a.m. Exec.:.
Director Helms on SALT agreements.
5116 Cap. ?
Interior Subcorrite-10 a.m. Exec.: ;
Surface mining bills. 3117 New PIA".
Judiciary-10:30 a.m. Exec.: Calendar
bus. 2300 New Bldg.
Conferees-11 a.m. HUD, space, science i
and veterans appropriations bill. $2281
Cap.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
ic.4...5HLI;Gi ON POT
Approved For Release 2001/03/041 ecjet.TwE80-01601R00
frs7 ;)/1' (bit-1)7161
ea: ? AL/ ./
Y
) * 0
67. rj
T d
./ Ty! ,
11 11 Il .?Ll Ct.9 Ult., 1 di
George. Lardner Jr.
\vast-aton pmt. Staff Writc?r
Sen. Henry M. Jackson (D- last few hours, the nature of -
Wash.). yesterday promised them and the extent of them," I
"tough out?stions" for the Jackson said he is especially'
Nixon administration at -con- concerned over the lack of a'
gressional hearings next Week specific limitation on the num-
on the strategic arms limita- her of land-based missiles and
(ion agreements with Moscow. the lack of any clear defini-
Voicing dissatisfaction with tion of what a "heavy missile"
the White House briefings for is,
key members of Congress on He said he suspects that the
Thursday, Jackson said he Soviet Union agreed to a limi-
plans to play the role of prose- tation on submarines because
euting attorney N')Ilerl the their construction could be
agreements come up before easily monitored.
the Senate Armed Services He felt Moscow balked at a?
Committee. definite limit on land-based
The senator told the Asso- missiles because these can be
dation of American Editorial scattered over millions of
Cartoonists that he felt the square miles in areas that are
Soviet Union would IT 'more covered by clouds "80 per cent'
intransigent" and "difficult to of time."
handle" as a result of the White House national se-i
agreements. He said they give eurity adviser. Henry A. Kis-
Moscow the edge "in crucial
singer had told Jackson and
categories .of strategic orlon- his congressional colleagues
sive systems." Thursday that if intelligence
Jackson reiterated fears
showed the Soviets signifi-
that election-year pressures
cantly exceeded the 1,618 mis-
led Presldent Nixon to make
silos they are believed to have,
damaging concessions. then "the whole premise of
? A high-ranking member of
the agreement will be in clues-
ihe Armed Services Commit-
tion,? even \vithout a specific
tee and dark-horse presiden-
limit, Jackson maintained yes-
tial hopeful, Jackson stopped
terday, in effect, that Ameri-
short of Saying he would vote
can intelligence may find its
against the agreements. He
surveillance efforts fruitless.
said he hoped he could sup-
Hearings on the agreements
port them. will begin Monday before the
But first, he said, he will try
senate
to find out "what concessions ? Foreign Relations
Committee with Secretary of
were made in Moscow -in the
State William P. Rogers as the
leadoff witness. Gerard C.
Smith, director of the Arms
Control and Disarmament
Agency, also will testify. On
Wednesday Defense Secretary
Melvin H. 'Laird and Adm.
Thomas H. Moorer, chair-
man of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, will testify. Both hear-
ings will be public. The For-
eign Relations Committee said
it also hopes to hear Cell#1111
Intelligence Agency ,Director
Richard Helms later in closed
session.
The Armed Services Com-
mittee will meet Tuesday with
Laird to hear about the im-
pact of the agreements on the
U. S. defense posture. The
aLkirr thej
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: Cli ?Rit4ciscifiatRalorikrowoom-1
. r
fiscal 1073-
STATOTHR
? ISALTIMUMI buu
z
Approved For Release 20014 da
. -RDP80-01601R001
-
ereenary use in Laos
shows evils of secrecy
Washington.
Secrecy leads to self-decep-
tion. If you want proof of that
overlooked political axiom,
:then look .at the way we have
gotten inVolved with a secret
mercenary army in Laos.
It.. all started *off not so
1. innocently a decade ago when the Central Intelligence Agen-
cy recruited, directed and
.supported an army of Meo
tribesmen to keep Laos from
going Communist. It was like
having a Gurkha army of our
own, only no one knew we
had it and thus nobody cared
that we were, getting ever.
mare involved in a war in
Laos. ? -
It- was all going along
'splendidly until the CIA sent
General ?Vang , Pao and his
army off .on ah ill-fated offen-
sive last spring. The Meo
"irregulars" got chewed up;
they had about 10 per cent
casualties. That might not
have, been too bad .except
there. were no more tribes-'
men to recruit in Laos. So the
. CIA started recruiting merce-
naries? in Thailand, only it
called them "volunteers."
Now the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee has discov,-
cred that we have a $100
. million annual commitment to,
finance an army of 10.000
Thai "volunteers" fighting in
Laos.
The Thai like it because
they are getting good pay as
well as extra military assist-
ance from, the United States.
Presurriably the Lao like it
because the Meo and Thai
can do the fighting. But what
about the Congress and the
'1$0or American taxpayer who
fever- knew they were run-
ring up a $100 million annual
bill in Laos? And what does it
.say about the present moral
' character of a nation that 200
years ago won its independ-
ence fighting Hessian merce-
naries?
Put asine all the moral,
geopolitical and financial con-
siderations. It's also a dis-
turbing case of the evils of
secrecy in our government
and Congress. Secrecy pro-
vides a way to subvert the
' ,Way it has tolerated secrecy'
even within its own ranks.
For all its criticism of the
executive branch, Congress
really, likes secrecy. At least
those in power do because
secrecy means power. "If you
only knew what I know"
makes a senator very impor-
tant in his own eyes and in,
the eyes of his colleagues. It?
also is a very good argument
to silence any upstart who
dares question the Wisdom of
the Appropriations Committee
or the Armed Services Com-
mittee.
constitutional checks and hal- If you want a bewildering
ances of the war powers. example, take the case of
Oh sure, the CIA informed Senator Symington. One day
a few members of the Appro- /he is issuing a statement de-
priations Committee. But then 4 ploring the executive branch's
it intimidated them by ex-
plaining it was so hush-hush
they couldn't talk about it to
the rest of Congress. After
that the privileged few didn't
even bother to raise questions
.?that was until Senator
Stuart Symington and his
Foreign Relations subcom-
mittee came along and start-
ed poking' around in the sec-
ret war in Laos. Even now
the State Department and
CIA won't 'fess up to what
they are doing with the Thai
mercenaries. The reason is
that Congress last year
passed a law prohibiting the
use of defense funds to help
third-country forces fight in
support of the Laotian or
Cambodian governments. If
all the facts were made pub-
lic, it would be evident that
the executive branch was vio-
lating the law.
It's easy enough to blame
the executive branch for its
secrecy. Everybody knows?
including President Nixon,
who issued a new executive
order on classification recent-
ly?that the government busi-
ness is weighted down with
excessive secrecy. There's
probably no cure unless bu-
reaucrats are punished for
over-classification, and no-
body is about to do that. 'But
much of the blame must be
placed on Congress for the
secrecy on the Thai merce-
naries. The next day he is on
the Senate floor questioning
whether secrets should be
given to members of Con-
gress except those on the
Armed Services, Foreign Re-
lations, and Atomic Energy
cominittees. Senator Syming-
ton, it should be pointed out,
is the only member of all ?
three committees.
Secrecy is also a convenient
way for Congress to avoid
responsibility it really doesn't
like. '"Only the President has
access to all the secret infor-
mation and he must know,
what is right." That's a com-
mon refrain around Capitol
Hill these days when the
President is getting us deeper
into the Vietnam war. It's
also an easy way to hide
behind the President and
duck responsibility.
The whole security system.
obviously is not going to
come tumbling down. Nor
should it. But once Congress
starts questioning it, maybe it
will begin to realize that Sen-
ator Mike Gravel has a point
when he argues that Congress
also can determine what in-
formation should be made
public. Right now it's reached
the point of absurdity; the
Senate sends its debates in.
secret session clown to . the'
executive branch to be de-
classified.
Congress ought :to under-
stand that it need not be such
a willing, acquiescent partner
in a secrecy system that
leads not only to deception
STATOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03 l
/X e? 61AuRbP8t141601R001400170001-1
s:
STATOTHR
'T/ii"AN 13151
Approved For Release 274 : ...-RDP80-0160
3 JUN 1972
The Day's Activities in Congress
TODAY
Senate
Meets at 10:30 a.m. on foreign ed
Committees:
Commerce Subcomte.-10 a.m. Open.
Reduced or discounted air fares for el-
derly, handicapped, or certain family
members of airline employees. Sen.
Percy; Robert Binder, DOT: Stuart Tip-
ton, Air Transport Assn. 5110 New Bldg.
Commerce-1D a.m. Open. 3-3474, funds
for National Traffic and Motor Vehicle
Administration Safety Act of 1966. Doug-
las Toms, National Highway Traffic
Safety Admin.; .Harris (Mow, and Carl
Nash, Public Interest Research Group.
1202 New Bldg.
Commerce-10 a.m. Open. Nominations
of Michael A. Gammino Jr., Joseph D.
Hughes, Gloria Anderson, Theodore
Braun, and Neal Blackwell Freeman as
directors of the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting; and of Frank Fitzsimmons
as a director of the Communications
Satellite Corp. 1318 New Bldg.
Judiciary Subcomte.-10 a.m. Open.
8-3538 and 3339, treatment of barbituates
In controlled substances schedules. Indus-
try witns. 2228 New Bldg.
Judiciary Subcomte:-10 a.m. Open.
Effectiveness of rehabilitation programs
of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. James
Hotta,. representing the Teamsters Union;
F. Lee Bailey; Ray, Prounier, Calif.
Dept. of Corrections; Two Inmates from
a correctional program "Break Through."
.118 Old Bldg.
Labor Subcomte.-10 a.m. Exec. 3-3327,
health maintenance organizations. .42.32
New Bldg.
Joint Economic-10 a.m. Open. Eco-
nomic development in Peoole's Republic
of China. Sen. Mansfield and Scott;
Prof. Ta-Chung Liu, chairman, dept. of
economics, Cornell University; Prof. Ben-
lamb', Schwartz, East Asian Research
Center, Harvard Univ. $-407 Cao.
Appropriati000-2 p.m. Exec. Secretary
of Defense Melvin R. Laird. 3-126 Cap.
Armed Services-10 A.111. Exec Briefing
on Southeast Asia. Brig. Gen. Pauly. 212
Old Bldg.
Finance-10 a.m. Exec. HR- 1. 2219
New Bldg.
IJoint Committee on Atomic Energy-
2 on. Exec. Briefing by CIA. 1-1-403 Cap.
Conferees-1:30 P.m. 3-1893, Restore
Golden Eagle program to provide for
three categories of annual recreation per-
mits. EF-100 Cap.
Conferees-10 a.m. HR 12931, Rural De-
velopment Act. 3-207 Cap. ,
Republican Polley-1213O p.m. 5-201 Public Works-10:30 a.m.-Exec. Public
Cap. ,bidgs. and grounds subcomte. Pending
bldg. prospectuses and S 961, Richard B.
Russell, fed, bldg. (11 a.m.)?HR 14475,
Capitol Power Plant Improvements. 2167
ROB.
Science-10 a.m.-Open. Subcornte. On
intl. cooperation In science and space.
U.S.-U.S.S.R. cooperative agreements.
McGeorge Bundy, ores., Ford Founda-
tion, and Herman Pollack, State Dept.1
2318 ROB.
Small Business-9:30 a.m.-Open. Sub- /
House combo on special small business prob.
'ems. Anticompetitive Impact of oil com-
pany ownership of petroleum products
pipelines. Hoyt Haddock, exec. dir., AFL-
CIO maritime comte.; D.C. and pub.
witns. 2359 ROB,
Small Business-10 a.m.-Open. Govt.
procurement subcomte. role of small
business In foreign trade and investment.
Dept. witns. 2237 ROB. ?
Veterans' Affairs-9:45 a.m.-Exec. S.
3343, Increase spec, housing allowance,
and HR 114 10, increase rates of serv-
ice-connected disability compensation. 334
COB.
Ways and Means-10 a.m.-Exec. Pend-
Inn legls. comte rm. LOB. ?
Government Operations-40 a.m.-Open,
Foreign oper, and govt. info, subcomte.
Pub. witns. 2154 ROB.
YESTERDAY
Democratic Policy-42:30 pan. 5-221
Cap.
Government Operations Subcomte.-10
a.m. Exec. S-1177, Consumer Protection
Act. 3302 New Bldg.
Conferees-10 a.m. S-2270, Water Pollu-
tion Control Act. S-146 Cap.
Conferees-3:30 P.T. HR 14734, USIA
authorization. 5-116 Cap.
Meets at noon on interior appropriation.
Committees:
Armed Services-10 a,m.-Exec. HR
12604, military procurement auth, John
Faster Jr., dir., Defense Research and
Engr., and Robt. Moot, asst, defense
sec. 2118 Rayburn Office Bldg.
Banking-10:30 a.m.-Open. Housing
legis, HUD sec. Rommey. 2128 ROB.
Crime ill U.S.-40 a.m.-Open. Organ-
lzed crime in sports. Unnamed witness
Will discuss the drugging of horses at
sixteen race tracks. 345 Cannon Office
Bldg.
Foreign Affairs-10 a.m.-Exec. Mark
up comte. Print of a Writ resolution con-
cerning termination of hostilities In In-
dochina. 2172 ROB.
Foreign Affairs-2 p.m.-Open. Intl. org.
and movements subcomte. Sanctions as
an instrumentality of the U.N. ?
Rhodesia as a case study. Amb. Wm.
Schaufele, senior adviser to the perma-
nent rep, to the U.N., and Bruce Oudes,
lournalist. 2255 ROB.
Commerce-10 a.m.-Open. Public health
and environ. Subcomte. HR 12563, Med-
ical Emergency Trans. and Service Act,
and HR 12787, Emergency Medical Serv-
ices Act. Dept. witns. 2323 ROB,
Commerce-10 a.m.-Exec, transporta-
tion and aronautics subcomte pending
legis. 2218 ROB;
Commerce-10 a.m.-Exec. Commerce
and finance subcomte. Staff rec. on the
securities Industry study. 2322 ROB.
Judiciary-10:30 a.m.-Exec. Pending
legis. 2141 ROB.
Merchant Marine-10 a.m.-Open. Coast
Guard subcomte, HR 8140, Ports end
Waterways Safety Act. Pub. wItns, 1334
Longworth Office Bldg.
interior-9:45 a.m.-Open. HR 7211,
Land use policy legis. 1324 LOB.
Post Office-9:30 a.m.-Exec. Retirement,
insurance and health benefits subcomte.
Mark-up pending legla. 210 COB.
Post Office?I0 a.m.-Open. Empl. bene-
fits subcomte. Proposals of CSC lob
evaluation and pay review task force.
Rbbt. Well, Assn. of Hearing Examiners,
HEW, and -pub. wlins. 321 COB.
Senate
Convened at 11 a.m.
Approved, 74-0, treaties on Internation-
al Plant Protection Convention, Acts of
Terrorism, and Swan Islands.
Approved by voice vote conference
report en HR 9580, D.C. truck fees,
Confirmed Thomas Patrick Melady as
ambassador to Uganda.
? Began debate on S 3390, foreign
mill-
tary aid authorization.
Adlourned at 4:26 P.M.
House
Convened at noon.
Approved, 320-0, HR 10792, SBA loan
ceiling.
Approved, 322-1, HR 12846, armed ;
forces drug treatment. .
Adiourned at 5:09 p.m.
President's Schedule
United Press International
President Nixon's appointments today:
8 a.m. ? Republican congressional
leaders.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
CHICAGO .TRIBLKIE
friotaktestillgr Release2911_3/04 ? CIA-RDP80-016
AY -N72
Clayton Fritchey-:- ' '? ? r77.7:74,w;:-.77...,?,,,
?
?
Accurate Reports, :
,
DyCIA Go
. Unheeded.
WASIIINGTON--Lif We didn't know
better; there would be reason to suspect
the. Central'. Intelligence Agency of
being in back of the celebrated "leaks"
that have stood Washington on its head
in recent times, for each of the revela-
tions has enhanced the reputation and
standing of the CIA'. ' ? '
In that respect, the latest expose re-
volving around the disclosure of the so-
Called "Kissinger 'Papers," is no differ-
ent from the famed "Pentagon Papers"
of last year or the more recent "Ander-
son Papers." No matter how you slice
these papers, the CIA comes out look-
ing realistic and dependable, at least
comparatively so.
? . .
Nixon Had Good Advice
?? ?
?
It is possible to see now [thru the
just-revealed Kissinger Papers] that ,
President Nixon, like President Johnson,
had good advice, much of it supplied by
the CIA, as well as bad advice, and.
that 'both chief executives chose to lis-
ten to what they wanted to. hear, .which
is why the, war is still going on.
Soon after.taking office in 1969, Nix-
on, thru his national security . adviser,
Henry Kissinger, initiated a review of
the Viet Nam conflict. The results of .
the study, leaked to the press and Con-
gress last week, showed the CIA was
bearish on the war. On . bombing, for.,
example, it said: .
"The air war did not seriously affect
the flow of men and supplies to Com-
munist forces in Laos and South Viet
Nam. Nor did it significantly erode
North Viet Nam's military defense ca-
pabilities or Hanoi's determination to
persist in the war."
That was nearly four years ago, and
still looks like sound advice today. Nix-,
on, however, didn't want to believe it
then and apparently can't reconcile
himself to it even now. The U. S. Air
Force is presently dropping more
bombs in Viet. Nam than ever before?
and the enemy is still advancing.
As pointed out by Daniel Ellsberg,
who leaked the Pentagon Papers, Presi-
dent Johnson was just as deaf to CIA
assessments. Ellsberg showed that.
Johnson had not lacked accurate intelli-
gence estimates from the CIA before he
escalatApprov.al ForhReltase
"Ile decisions seemed to have been
made year after year in the light of
make better decisions. If the President
had this information available, why did
he ignore it? Why did he listen to Walt
Rostow and McGeorge Bundy as ex-
perts on Viet Nam instead of people
who had a very good track. record for
prediction?" ?
The later Anderson Papers shed some
?light on Presidential decision-making.
The off ic a 1 documents that were
brought to light by columnist Jack An-
derson center on the recent war be-
tween Pakistan and India. They showed
the CIA once again providing a realistic
estimate of the situation and a Presi-
dent once again choosing to: ignore' it.
Nixon wanted Pakistan to win and or-
dered all hands to "tilt" against India,
even tho he was' warned that it was a
losing cause.' - ??? ? ?
Key Committee Role - ?
?
Now that Presidential brinksmanship
has spurred Congress to reassert its
war making powers, it is imperative
that key cominittees, such as Foreign .
Relationi and Armed Services, have .de-
pendable intelligence on which to act.
No time should be lost In -passing the
Cooper bill to bring this about.
STATOTHI
? This legislation, introduced by Sen.
John Sherman Cooper [R.,. Ky.], would /
require the CIA to share its reports -7
"fully and currently" with the appropri-
ate committees on Capitol Hill. "I con-
tend," says Coaper, "that the Congress,
which must make decisions upon for-
eign policy and national security and
which is called upon to commit materi-
al and human resources of the nation, ?
should :have access to all available in-
formation and intelligence to discharge
properly, and niorally its responsibility
to our government and its people."
The CIA briefings Congress gets now
are limited to what the administration'
wants it to know. There is a so-called
?"watchdog committee" [a small infor-
mal group of senators and congress-
men] that is supposed to keep ,an eye
on the CIA, but it didn't hold a single
meeting -all last year. It .will be said
that Congress can't be trusted for sensi-
tive information. Well, the greatest se-
crets of all, involving nuclear develop-
2 Cgril0 31041ar0 MORD P80-04601R001400170001-1
ic Energy Committee of congress, and
there has never been a leak in 25 years.
nf nr. fr.? ? . .
?
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
BE IT Co
Available
Approved For Release 200.1/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
THE PROGREZSIVE
Approved For Release 2001/03/04m.aCIWRDP80-01601R00146611ARII11
According to an official estimate re-
cently presented to Congress, the for-
eign intelligence-gathering activities of
the. CIA, the military services, and
sundry mysterious agencies of the Fed-
eral Government cost the taxpayers
about $3 billion a year. A less official
but probably more realistic estimate
current on -Capitol Hill places the cost
of these operations at about. twice that
amount. Except for a few favored mem-
bers of the Appropriations and Armed
Services Committees, no one in Con-
gress knows precisely where in the Fed-
?cral budget these appropriations arc
hidden, or how much they amount to,
or what they produce.
Senator John Sherman Cooper,
Kentucky Republican, is sponsoring .
legislation that would require thev.
CIA to provide the Armed Services
and Foreign Affairs Committees with
? the same reports it now furnishes to
the White House--"fully and current-
ly," as his bill states. The Senator
makes a persuasiVe case, maintaining
that "the Congress, which must make
decisions on foreigi.1 policy
al security, whi, -M.?1 I
COMtilif 1.110 111:11, d :-? I
smite (.9 of Ow ? ?-1
cr-Y; .fn :111 :1%:111:11)1??
itifrIliry?mf! 10
root ally jh ir.'ipotri111111V 10
?
Far less permasive is i'etuntor Coo_
P''5 contention that members of these
cot?tnitters can - and shonld?be count-
ed on to keep such information se-
c.ret front their constituents, In the
last analysis, aren't all Americans re-
sponsible for "decisions on foreign pol-
icy and national seenrity"? Aren't
all Americans called upon to "Commit
the material and human rest-mites of
the nation"----their material and hiu
man- resources? Th(s.14011:`,
all Americans have access to "avail-
able information and intelligence"?
If the American people had known
all the facts about Indochina eight or
ten years ago, they might not have
acted any more wisely than the nation-
al security managers who were privy.
to the. data. But they could hardly
have acted more foolishly.
TRI4,-.111#611
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
STATOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03/04 : CIA-RDP80-016
ST. LOUIS, MO.
GLOBE?DEMOCRAT
MORNING ? 292,789
WEEKEND ? 306,889
APR 2 b' 1972
Edward W. O'Brien
Soviet spying unmasked
WASHINGTON ? It's not fashionable any
j longer to apply the term "Cold War" to the
competition between the United States and
the Soviet Union.
Semantics-a si d e,
the two super-powers
are in fact in a great
struggle for what
each considers to be
; stakes of the highest
, value. Tangled
though the Vietnam
war issues are, one
issue surely is the fu-
ture role of Washing-
ton and Moscow in
; the future of South-
east Asia.
In other parts of
the world, the strug-
gle takes varied
? forms; one of them O'Brien
being the collection of information ? or,
bluntly, espionage. It is for this purpose that
American taxpayers appropriate hundreds of
:anillion,s of dollars annually to the Central In-
tell i g en ce Agency and possibly larger
amou tit s to military intelligence organiza-
, tions.
A few years ago, the CIA was a high-priori-
ty target in this counyy of many Leftists,
? who said the United States should not soil its
hands on dirty tricks against the Kremlin.
RECENTLY, DOMESTIC ATTACKS on the
\J CIA have subsided, partly because of its dis-
creet and effective director, Richard Helms,
who has succeeded in disarming most con-
gressional critics of CIA by informing them
honestly and fully about his agency's findings
and conclusions.
How about the other side?
As Often happens in such matters, little has
been said publicly in the United States about
Russian espionage operations except for an
;. occasional brief headline when the FBI
f, catches a Soviet agent in the act.
Now the Senate Internal Security subcom-
mittee has published a priceless tool for any
American with a serious interest in Soviet in-
,' telligence and 'security operations.
THE SUBCOMMITTEE BOOK is a 289-
page list and summary of published materi-
als about achievements of Soviet intelligence
agencies. The notable aspect of all this is
that most of the materials were published in
and by the Soviet itself, in books, magazines,
and newspapers.
Until eight years ago, the Russians main-
tained their traditional policy of silence about
their espionage activities. Premier Nikita
Khrushchev, for example, declared in 1962
that the Soviet was not engaging in espionage
because it did not intend to attack anyone
and therefore did r not need such information.
But on Sept. 4, 1964, the Senate study
states, "the Soviet Union did a dramatic re-
versal, and since then there has been a spate
of articles and books extolling the Soviet in-
telligence and security services and creating
a new pantheon of heroes?the staunch pro-
tectors of the fledgling Communist regime of
the 1918-1921 period and the intrepid intelli-
gence operatives spying abroad during the in-
ter-war period at great personal sacrifice and
danger for the Soviet fatherland."
THE FIRST OF THE NEW heroes was-
Richard Sorge, Who spied brilliantly for the
Soviet in Tokyo just before and during World
War II. He was discovered, tortured, and ex-
ecuted by the Japanese in 1994.
Once the publicity barrier was down, many
other spies were deified. Rudolf Abel, who
was convicted in New York in 1957 and later
sent back to Moscow in a prisoner exchange,
was glorified as another Sorge by the KGB,
the Soviet security service.
"The admission to the Soviet people that
the KGB ? long portrayed to them as an in-
ternal, defensive arm of the state ? does in
fact engage in peacetime spying abroad wa,s
even more dramatic than the revelations of
the activities of military intelligence," The
Senate study said.
Some of the Soviet books and articles are
available in English translation from the
Commerce Department's Joint Publications
Research Service here. Even the brief de-
scriptions in the Senate compilation provide a
rare glimpse into an obscure side of the all
too real world. .
_ ' ? -
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-016011300400170001-1
siAiOIHR
WOODBURY, N.J.
TIMES
APR 1 8 1972
E - 21,314
(irc:onsgress Should Kno
The Daily Times fervently hopes that
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
will report favorably on a bill requiring
the cent r tel1Ienc4,4vcy to pro-
vide
cer am ongressional committees
, with the same intelligence reports and
analyses the Agency furnishes regularly
to the White House.
And we hope the Senate takes prompt
, favorable action on the measure, too. The
bill was introduced last year by Senator
Cooper of Kentucky.
If Congress is to assume or, more
properly, re-assume its role in the for-
eign policy process, it must have ade-
quate information.
The average U.S. citizen hasn't the
foggiest notion what the,Z7TA is doing or
where it is doing .it. This s crecy might
very well be essential to the agency's
function. But the U.S. intelligence gather-
ing operations cost the American tax-
payer up to $6 billion annually and, at
the very least, the taxpayers are entitled
to some assurance that this intelligence
information and analysis is furnished to
-their elected representatives who serve
on the Congressional Cominittee vitally ;
concerned,
The Pentagon paper&. illustrated the
fact that some intelligence assessments
are sometimes at odds with White House
policies.
Moreover, a CIA official has disclosed
that his agency has been furnishing high-
ly secret intelligence on world atomic
developments to the Joint Atomic Energy
Committee for 15 years without a breach
in security.
Actually it is time that Congress estab-
lished close scrutiny of all intelligence .
operations.
Back in 1967, the CIA tried to head
off similar legislation by inviting three
members of the Foreign Relations Com-
mittee to attend joint briefings of the
Armed Services and Appropriations Corn-
mittee.s which are now responsible for
overseeing intelligence matters. But not
a single meeting of this group was called
during all of last year.
We believe it is essential that at least
some key members of Congress' keep in-
formed about what this secret arm of
the Government is doing.
? -
How else can Congress assume ? and
fulfill ? its own responsibilities in the
field of U.S. foreign policy?
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
li
C.
ST. LoyrAporsilTliwsp2Apan STATOTHR
Approved For Release 200143/04 : jIA-RDP80-01601
Bring The CIA To? Heel
Although CongresS :;11 the, foreign aid
authorization bill signed earlier this year im-
posed some controls over the Central Intelli-
gence Agency, the free wheeling CIA still
operates without much accountability to the
legislative branch of government. Its budget
remains secret. And only last month a study
by the General Accounting revealed that
. Agency for International Development funds
intended for public health use in Laos were
being diverted to the CIA for use in the guer-
"rilla war in that country.
5 The record of CIA disdain for the will of
Cungress underscores the importance of Senate
Foreign Relations Committee hearings on a bill
proposed by Senator John Sherman Cooper/ j
which would oblige the agency to provide
congressional committees dealing with armed
.services and foreign policy "fully and cur-
rently" with both intelligence information and
evaluations affecting foreign relations and na-
tional security. Two former .CIA officials, Dr. ?i
Herbert Scoville and Chester L. Cooper, testi-
fying for the bill, said the agency should pro-
vide Congress with the same analyses it now
regularly prolrides the White House.
At present CIA briefings of Congress are j
?provided only as sanctioned by the White
House. Since Congress also has authority in
foreign relations and military affairs, there is
justification for giving the legislators access to
CIA data. Indeed, its machinations in the mili-
tary and political affairs of other countries sug-
gest that it has arrogated to itself so many im-
proper policy-making initiatives that the agency
should be either be abclished pr restricted by
law. to intelligence gathering alone. , ?
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
_
Approved For Release 2SISAGSal:BC9AE-RDP80-01601
7 APR 1972.
Secrets of the CIA
- The Senate Foreign Relations Commit-
tee is considering a bill seeking to force .
the Central Intelligence Agency to cut /
Congress in on the Same secret reports
it makes to the White House. The Nixon
administration opposes the. legislation
and proponents concede it would be dif-
ficult to override a Presidential veto.
The administration appears to fear
that if 535 members of the House- and
Senate got this information it wouldn't
be secret very long and that the prin-
cipal beneficiary might be Jack Ander-
son, the muckraking columnist, who has
a great itch to read secret papers.
Among the supporters of the bill is
Sen. Charles H. Percy of Illinois, who
had an interesting,i,rgument why mem-
bers of Congress need all the?informa-
tion they can get, lie confessed to vot-
ing wrong on the supersonic transport
and the antiballistic missile defense sys-
tern, both of which he opposed, stating
that he had been misled by "fallacious"
information.
We suppose it is better to find out.
late that you were wrong than never. l
STATOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
STATOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R0
LEXINGTON, KY.
HERALD
M ? 52,174
HERALD?LEADER _ ?
; -7!
( Sen. Cooper
4 ,
-.
en. John Sherman Cooper is one of
' the most responsible and experienced
,members of the U.S. Senate. His influence
:* on foreign affairs is particularly telling.
, So when the Kentucky Republican
, introduces a piece of foreign-policy
legislation, his colleagues as well as the
press generally take note.
I, introduced bill requiring the Central
, Thus it is that Sen. Cooper's recently
Intelligence Agency to share its reports
"fully and currently" with the military
' and foreign-affairs committees on Capital
Hill was the subject of the lead editorial
in Sunday's Washington Post.
Said the Post: "No more useful piece
of foreign-policy legislation has been
drafted since Congress got its dander up
? ? .
Opening hearings on the measure, Sen-
Cooper declared, "I contend that the
Congress which must make decisions
upon foreign policy and national security,
which is called upon to commit the
aterial and human. resources of the
ation, should have access to all available
? _
And The CIA
?
information and intelligence to discharge
properly,and morally its responsibility to
our.government and it's people."
Cooper would require. the CIA to keep
Congress as well as the Executive in-
formed, just as the Atomic Energy
Commission and Defense . Department
have been required to keep Congress'
-Joint Atomic Energy Committee informed
in that field since 1946. -
It seems to us that Sen. Cooper is
quite right to regard the CIA as an
agency of disinterested specialists
providing a necessary and valuable
product, intelligence ,which Congress has
reason and right to share. -
The exemplary record of Congress ill
dealing with atomic energy makes it
untenable to claim that Congress can't
keep secrets. The overriding point is that
Congress cannot make good decisimis if
it does not have good and timely in-
formation.
We trust that other senators afid the
Nixon Administration will. look sym-
pathetically upon Sen. Cooper'slill.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
YQiiK STIES
Approved For Release 20A/001,FCIA-RDP80-016011Vgg0T01-11V0001-1
Congress arid C.I.A.
The. Senate Foreign Relations Committee conducted
hearings last week on a bill requiring the Central Intelli-
gence Agency to provide the appropriate Congressional
cotrunittees with the same intelligence analyses it regu-
larly furnishes the White House. This legislation, intro-
duced last year by Senator Cooper, ought to be expedited
in the interests of strengthening the machinery of foreiR
policy.
As Congress reasserts its rightful role in the foreign
policy process, it is essential that its members be as
fully informed as possible. The respective Congressional
committees are entitled to share the fruits of intelligence-
gathering operations for which the American taxpayer
Is billed up to $6 billion annually. These fruits include
assessments which sometimes sharply challenge Execu-
tive policies, as the Pentagon Papers revealed.
There is ample precedent for Senator Cooper's pro-
posal. A former C.I.A. official testified last week that v
the agency has been furnishing highly classified intelli-
gence on world atomic developments to the Joint Atomic
Energy Committee for fifteen years, with no security,
breaches. Even now, senior agency officials provide oral
briefings to other committees on request but only with
White House approval. Congress could better discharge
its own constitutional responsibilities in the foreign
policy field if it had full and direct access to this
information.
Beyond the Cooper bill, it is high time Congress
revived its languishing effort to establish closer scrutiny
of intelligence operations. In a move designed to side-
track legislation with this aim, the Foreign Relations
Committee in 1967 was invited to send three members
to the C.I.A. joint briefings held by the Armed Services /
and Appropriations Committees, which are \currently
responsible for overseeing intelligence activities. But no'
meetings of this group were called during all of last I
year?an "oversight" of frightening dimensions.
It is not enough for Congress to know what the C.I.A._
is saying. Itis also essential that at least key members of
the legislative branch, which provides the funds for
worldwide intelligence-gathering and other undercover
operations, keep informed about what, in general, this
secret arm of the United States Government is doing.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
\I
SUNBURY , PA.
Approved For ReleaR9b0A1A3/041: (01E-RW.80-01601
E 985
Freedom, Ah, it's Ito-nderfu
?.;
Sharp indeed is the contrast between the suppression:
of public information in countries behind the iron curtain
in Eastern Europe and the bamboo shield in Asia when ?
one considers the goldfish bowl operation of government .
in these United States. Nevertheless disseners and
critics, whether motivated by politics, sincere convictions
or plain antagonism toward the American way of life,:
are raising their voices to a high pitch and their targets
are numerous and varied. . - ,
Approaching the ultimate is a movement now under-1 ,
?
way to require the cs,atra I I nte litence Agency, top secret
arm of the federal government, divulge to Congress its
most confidential and sensitive reports. And John A.
McCone, former CIA director has not only endorsed the
legislation, which the Nixon administration opposes, but
has committed himself to testify in support of it in an
anticipated Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.
The role of the CIA in Southeast Asia has cropped-up
? incidentally from time to time and its imprint has been
1 visible in the Mi dle East as well as in Latin America, t
most recently in connection with alleged efforts to counter
i the Allende regime's communizing of Chile and the con-
fiscation of valuable industrial properties owned by Uni-
f ted States investors.
? Veils of secrecy; the rending of which lead to im-
prisonment in Soviet Russia, as illustrated by the recent
imposition of prison terms of up to 18 years upon dissen-
ters, naturally raise questions in American minds, but,,'
the character of CIA operations and their effectivenessv
with respect to the nation's security are vital considera-
tions. And the blabbermouth tendencies of many mem-
bers of Congress, including some of the most 'influen-
tial senators are well known.
If these men faithfully performed their duties fears
of intolerable super secrecy would be needless.
? Misconstruing liberty for license is a practice that
has been carried to extremes, as witness an attempt by
? sympathizers of Father Philip Berrigan and his co-defend-
ants in an alleged anarchistic conspiracy of shocking
, proportions to blockade the Harrisburg federal building
where they have been on trial. And in this same connec-
tion, the/ arrival on that scene of Alger Hiss who served
a much-too-short prison sentence for selling, while a
: top aide in the Department of State, secret information
; to Soviet Russia. His harangue outside the courthouse
to the effect that the Berrigan case was another example
of ."McCarthyism" could hardly have been in poorer taste.
-And in this same connection, Berrigan sympathizers tak-
ing credit for damaging a number of shell casings at a
York defense plant in protest against the waning Vietnam
war added to the nausea.
Finally, Federal Judge Joseph Lord of Philadelphia
ruled in recent days, over opposition of the federal govern- ?
' m, ent, that a dissenters' suit contesting constitution-
alitythe' of the Vietnam war is entirely in order and merits full
' judicial consideration. So a three-judge panel will conduct
a belated post-mortem. The complications inherent in
that litigation are too earth-shaking _for ready corn- ,
?prehension, but there it is ? more than a decade after
, the Kennedy administration involved the nation in the
:conflict.
America has been traditionally known as the bastion.
Approved ForReleardee240/03/04teCIAGREEP804313601-1R001-410170001-1
dant, but the gyrations at times become most confusing.
: .
STATOTHR
Tat
Approved For Release
ios
: CIA-RDP80-01601R0
"d th
ongress an e CIII
No more useful piece of foreign-policy legislation
has been drafted since Congress got its dander up
than Senator Cooper's bill requiring the Central
Intelligence Agency to share its reports "fully and
currently" with the military and foreign-affairs
committees on Capitol Hill. "I contend," said Mr.
' Cooper, opening hearings, "that the Congress,
which must make decisions upon foreign policy
and national security, which is called upon to coin-
..mit.the material and human resources of the nation,
'should have access to all available information and
-intelligence to discharge properly and morally its
jresponsibility to our government and its people."
. Meaning to end the practice of arbitrary CIA brief-
'?ings, he would require the CIA to keep Congress as
well as the Executive informed, just as the Atomic
?Energy, Commission and Defense Department have
been required to keep the Joint Atomic Energy
Committee informed in that field since 1946.
It seems to uslir. Cooper is quite right to regard
the CIA?at least, that largest part of it concerned
with intelligence?not as a beast needing to be
tamed, as many of its critics do; not as a baby
needing to be coddled, as most members of the
congressional "oversight" committees do; but as
an agency of disinterested specialists providing a
necessary and valuable product, intelligence, which
Congress has reason and right to share. Such an
'approach accords with the CIA's known capabilities
and it accords as well with the political realities:
'efforts to tighten legislative oversight have tradi-
tionally failed.
Mr. Cooper has taken an undogmatic approach
...to such essential questions as what part of the CIA
STATOTHR
paper factory's product should be made available,
by what procedures, with what security arrange-
ments, and so on. He hopes to avoid a constitu-
tional challenge, noting that since Congress created
the CIA, it can direct it to share. its output. No
substantial question of executive privilege is in-
volved, in his view, since Congress would not be
asking for the advice the President receives from
his lieutenants but for the information on which
the advice is based. Further hearings will explore
these sub-issues.
e-tss
The overriding point remains that Congress can-
not make good decisions if it does not have good
and timely information. The CIA is the logical place
to look: it is charged with collating all intelligence
produced within the government and, unlike the
Executive departments which deal in the critical
fields of weapons, military aid or arms control, it
has (in those -fields) no operational responsibilities
and hence no incentive to shape its intelligence to
fit its own departmental programs. The exemplary
record of Congress in dealing with atomic energy
makes it untenable to claim that Congress can't
keep secrets. Anyway, everyone knows that it's the
Executive branch which does most of the leaking.
Regular provision of CIA information to Congress
would probably tend to limit the practice of self-
serving Executive leaks.
We trust the President will look sympathetically
upon this bill introduced by one of the most -re-
sponsible and experienced . members of his own
party and realize its potential advantages to the
Congress and to the nation as well.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R00140010001-1
PRO4-.111ENCE, R.I.
BULLETIN
E 149,463
APR -I 17?
STATOTHR
CIA infor
at=30w"
One of the recurring criticisms of the Central
? ? Intelligence Agency is that despite the hundreds of
; millions of dollars it spends to gather information,
the distribution of that information is so limited that
' Congress has little benefit from it. A remedy for
this gap has been proposed by former CIA official,
Dr. Herbert Scoville Jr., once deputy director for
/ research, has suggested that the same intelligence
and analyses be supplied to appropriate congressional
-committees as now goes to the White House. Ho'
argues that while much information is provided by
the executive branch to Congress, it is subject to.
distortion by administrative officials.
- There arc two aspects of such a development
that raise questions. One is the issue of security. But
Dr. Scoville pointed out that CIA intelligence has
been submitted regularly to the Joint Congressional
Committee on Atomic Energy for years, as required
by statute, without any breaches of security. The
other is the danger of congressional members being
overwhelmed with a mass of information.
. To solve the latter problem, another former CIA
official, Chester L. Cooper, proposes that represen-
tatives of the CIA be assigned to the congressional
.committees to screen out the important material and
bring it to their ?attention. The material wouldn't
ation
be available to everybody, but only to those commit-
tees dealing with foreign affairs and national secur-
ity.
? In a period when Congress is insisting that it
be given a larger voice in the direction of foreign
policy and those activities 'likely to involve the
United States in international conflict, it is vital
that its members be fully informed. In the recent
past, the accumulation of power in the White House
has left Congress all too often in the dark or able to
obtain only what information the executive feels it
should have.
Many critics in .Washington feel that the CIA
and its activities should be controlled directly by
the State Department, except perhaps for clandestine
activities, which should be directed separately. There
have been many indications in the past decade that
the CIA operates independently of the State Depart-
ment and, as a result, has a tendency to make its
own foreign policy. While the State Department's
state of eclipse is such today that it is acarcely in
a position to assert greater control over the CIA,
increased reporting to Congress might at least keep
Congress in closer touch with the realities of power
in the federal government and enable it to make
sounder decisions on policies to be followed by both
agencies
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-0160t1T0A04W0001-1
CHARLOTTE, N.C.
NEWS
E ? 65,014
MAR 3 1l7
informing The Congress
:If the power of Congress as one of
the three equal branches of government.
jfas waned in recent times, it is in part
./because the legislators don't always have
sufficient information to make sound de-
cisions, much less to exert influence. No-
where is this more true than in the field
of foreign affairs.
The President, of course, is granted
the authority to make foreign policy, but
at the same time the Congress holds the
constitutional power to make war. Obvi-
ously these roles overlap. Nonetheless, it
is past tiine for Congress to re-assert its
prerogatives. A beginning would be to de-
mand information.
? A bill which would accomplish that
to some degree has been introduced by
Sen. John Sherman Cooper (R-1v.) The
bill calls for the Central Intelligence
J Agency (CIA),tu inform "fully and cur-
rently" tlid.'committees in the House and
Senate concerned with military and for-
eign affairs. In Cooper's words, it would
grant some members of Congress "access
to all available information and intellig-
ence" so that the legislature "can dis-
charge properly and morally" its respon-
sibility.
That ? doesn't seem unreasonable, al-
though the Nixon administration opposes
the measure for reasons not altogether
clear. Certainly it would seem members
of: the select committees involved could
be trusted with the highly classified in-
formation. It is realized, of course, that
in a body as large as Congress, there will
be. a few blabbermouths. Still, it seems
Cooper's Bill Deserves
A Full And Fair Hearing
well worth the risk that a secret might
be compromised. The alternative is for
Congress to keep operating without bene-
fit of this information.
. The Pentagon Papers have demon-
strated that the Vietnam War might have
been prosecuted differently, or not at all,
had all information been known to Con-
gress and not just information which
LBJ . wanted Con gr es s to have.
Much the same can be said of warlike ac-
tions against Cuba and the Dominican
Republic.
The Cooper bill may have rough
sledding, but it has picked up support
from impressive, if unexpected, sources.
This week two former senior CIA offi-
cials recommended that the CIA maintain
liason with the Congress on a regular ba-
sis. At the same time one charged that
the administration "misused" intelligence
in 1969 when it asserted the Russians
were on the verge of having a first-strike
capability.
It is still too early to endorse the
bill; more debate is clearly called for.
Yet some type of guarantee that the Con-
gress will be informed is necessary and
this bill may be the vehicle. Hopefully it d.?
will get a full hearing.
?
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-0160
LOUIT6VILLE, KY.
COURIER JOURNAL
M ? 23949
S ? 350,303
3 ..1 197a
STATOTHR
tmally ready to t
, EVEN OUR SPIES now doubt the wisdom
lof whispering their secrets into the ears of
-only one man and giving him exclusive con-
trol over that ultimate tool of foreign policy?
war.
At least that's the interpretation many ob-
i/ servers have placed on John A. McCone's en-
dorsement of Senator John Sherman Cooper's
bill to require the Central Intelligence Agency
- to turn over its secret intelligence reports to
? Congress. Although Mr. McCone no longer
'runs the CIA, the agency's former directors
are known to be a close-knit group who al-
most -never take a public position which is
opposed by the incumbent director.
Since Mr. McCone committed himself the
; -other day to testify in favor of the bill be-
fore the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
jit's widely believed that he'll be saying what
the current CIA director, Richard Helms,
would say if he could. The Nixon administra-
tion opposes Senator Cooper's bill, and Mr.
Helms, if he values his job, must keep silent.
The bill was introduced last July, after pub-
lication of the Pentagon Papers revealed that
a succession of presidents had deceived the
public and the Congress about the situation
in Vietnam. The papers also revealed that the,
CIA?which over the years had been blamed.
formany of our failures in Indochina?had,
in fact, consistently expressed a ? skeptical
view of our Vietnam policy from the Truman
to the Nixon administrations..Actinci contrary
to intelligence reports that they Zone could
see, and gulling Congress and the public into
blind support of their policies, these presi-
dents eventually gave us, our longest arid most.
futile war. ? ? -
Senator Cooper's bill?which, woUld require
the CIA to make regular reports to four con-
gressional committees and supply other in-
formation on demand?should prevent a re-
currence of those monstrous errors. Mr.
McCone's endorsement of the bill is an en-
couraging sign that, such a return to presi-
dential and congressional responsibility isn't
impossible.
. ,
SENATOR SOAPER SAYS one reason th&:
pandas will go to the Washington Zoo is that? .
the climate there is good for pandas. We pad-
. always wondered what it might be good .foL.,
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved For Release 20Q03104c:IcIA-RDP80-01601R00
29 MARCH 1972
:
, A Matifier of iiii.eiligence .
Diplomatic dealing and higher-level
statecraft often require attentive alert-
ness, but it has sometimes. happened
that even the most astute leaders out-
smarted themselves because they under-
estimated their own intelligence.
-Successive recent Presidents of the
United States, for instance, either dis-
counted or downgraded perceptive pro-
fessional intelligence estimates about
Vietnam?the dismal details are fully
recorded in some of the Pentagon.
papers?and it is clearly lamentable
that some of the more prescient counsel
went no further than the files.
There are many such reasons why
the Central Intelligence Agency's anal-
STATOTHR
yses of various foreign policy problems
should be more widely accessible, and
some of the organization's unhonored
prophets seem to agree. Former direc-
tor John A. McCone is apparently speak-
ing for them as well as himself in
supporting a pending bill that would
provide key Congressional . committees
with CIA estimates and even some
special surveys.
Since the American public is pay-
ing for this advice, its representatives
are fully entitled to more than a fleet-
ing look, and it is quite possible that far
better informed Congressional opinion
would result?whatever the prevailing
view at the White House.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
1
Appr9yQd Epr,Releap 21:104/619/b497.1A-RDP80-01601
cess by Hill 1
A
:
-CIA.. Dat
mna itc1.6d,
Hee
ist
STATOTHR
By Stanley Karnow
Washington Post Staff Writer '
Two for in senior em- Congress "would raise a con-
ployees of the .Central Intelli-
gence Agency urged yesterday
that selected congressional
committees be provided regu-
larly with CIA information
and analysis concerning U.S.
foreign relations and "matters
'
/f national security."
- ? The ex-CIA men, Chester L.
Cooper and Herbert Scoville
Jr., testified at a Senate For-
eign Relations -Committee
hearing convened to discuss a
bill introduced . by Sen. John
v, Sherman Cooper (R-Ky.) to
amend the National Security
Act of 1947.
;. The bill, a variation of pre-
stitutional question as to sepa
ration of powers betwen the
Legislative and Executive
Branches."
Chester Cooper, 55, a vet-
eran of the CIA, the State De-
partment and the White
House who now works for the
institute of Defense Analyses,
recommended yesterday that a
special staff of "carefully"
chosen officers serve as Rai--
son men between the CIA and
the congressional committees.
He warned against Congress
demanding access to all intel-
ligence studies, saying that
"the mind boggles at the
vious congressional efforts to
thought of truckloads of classi-
supervise the U.S. intelligence
community, calls for the CIA
jtb "inform fully and cur-
"' rently" the Armed Services
and Foreign Affairs Commit-
tees of ?the House of Repre-
sentatives as well as the Sen-
ate Armed Services and For-
eign Relations Committees.
Speaking in defense of his
_proposal, Sen. Cooper said
that it "would not affect in
any way or inquire into the in-
? telligence gathering activities
of the CIA, its methods,
sources, funds or personnel."
Its ? main purpose, the sena-
tor explained, is to give Con.
;gress -"access to all available
Information and intelligence"
so that the legislature can
"discharge properly and mor-.
.ally its responsibility."
The. Nixon ailministration
has voiced its hostility to the
.bill in a State Department let-
ter sent in January to Sen. J.
William ? Fulbright (D-Ark.),
the Foreign Relations Commit-
tee chairman, saying that re-
quiring the CIA to inform
Congress. is "incompatible"
with the Secretary of State's
role as principal foreign policy
adviser to the President.
The State Department let-
ter described by _Eulhright as
ApptiameowtsaraKedeMe
ever seen," also said that an
obligation for the CIA to brief
1
Both former CIA filen eau:
toned the committee against'
having Congress provide the
public with information given
to its committees by the intel-
ligence community.
Sources close to the commit-
tee also expressed "fears pri-
vately that any intention on
the part of Congress to release
CIA intelligence to the public
might restult in the defeat of
the bill.
lied documents being deliv-
ered daily to the Senate and
House mailroom.
The former CIA employee
therefore .Suggested that Con-
gress be authorized to receive!
the National Security Study!
Memoranda, an eclectic set of i
documents that contain a wide
array of information and in-
terpretation of current policy
options.
The other committee wit-
ness, Scoville, 57, formerly the /
CIA's Director of Science ancl)?/
Technology, asserted that the
administration has deliber-
ately misused intelligence hi
its presentations to Congress
to promote its own legislation.
Scoville alleged that admin-
istration Spokesmen in PM
sought to justify the Safe-
guard anti-ballistic missile
program before Congress by
reporting that the Soviet
Union would soon acquire a
"first-strike capability" that
demanded endorsement of the
U.S. program.
Disputing the administra-f
tion argument that intelli-
gence briefings.yaise a "Con--
stitutional question." Scoville
said that the Joint Atomic En-
ercy Intellig_ence Committee
061/03104eZIAIRDR80-01601R001400170001-1
function in the realm of nu-
clear developments for years.
NM YORK TIMES
Approved For Release 2001/03/0219: gik-peso-o
DATA TO CONGRESS
FROM C.I.A. URGED
Two Ex-Agency Aides Back
Bill to Require Reports
By BENJAMIN WELLES
sptchu to The New York TImee
.WASHINGTON, March 28?
Two former officials of the
Central Intelligence Agency
urged Congress today to require
the agency to provide it fully
and currently with the same
intelligence and analyses it now
regularly provides the White
House.?
Dr. Herbert Scoville Jr., a
former Deputy Director for Re-
search, noted that for 15 years
the agency had been supplying
the Joint Congressional Atomic
Energy Committee with highly
classified intelligence on world
atomic developments. There
have been no security breaches,
he said.
Dr. Scoville also suggested
4 that regular briefings of Con-
gressional committees dealing
with foreign affairs wo,uld en-
hance? not jeopardize? na-
tional security.
At present, he said, both
Congress and the public are de-
pendent on the Administration
for information, which is often
"distorted" to suit Administra-
tion policies.
Would Screen Information
Chester L. Cooper, a former
senior analyst on Vietnam for
the agency and now an execu-
tive of the Institute for Defense
Analyses here, urged that se-
lected agent officers with ex-
perience on the National Secu-
rity Council staff? be assigned
tours of duty with Congres-
sional committees dealing with
foreign and national security af-
fairs.
These officers, he suggested,
would screen . what was im-
portant for Congress and thus
prevent its being "drowned" in
a flood of intelligence material
?much of it irrelevant.
Mr. Cooper also urged con-
gress to seek access to Na-
tional Security Connell study
memorandums which, he noted,
include not only intelligence
but also other pertinent in-
formation relevant to policy de-
cisions.
Dr. Scoville and Mr. Cooper
testified before the Senate For-
eign Relations Committee, wrich
was opening hearings today on
a bill proposed by Senator John
Sherman Cooper, Republican of
Kentucky.
The measure, sponsored in
the House by Representative
Paul Findley, Republican of Il-
linois, would oblige the agency
to provide Congressional com-
mittees dealing with armed
services and foreign policy
"fully and currently" with
both intelligence information
and evaluations affecting for-
eign relations and national se-
curity.
Senior agency officials pro-
vide frequent oral briefings on
world affairs at the request of
Congressional committee chair-
men, but these briefings are
expressly sanctioned by the
White House.
With the exception of the:
Atomic Energy Act, there is
no legislation that requires the
agency to disclose its opera-
tions or its findings to Con-
gress. , ? . I
STATOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
STATOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R
NEW YORK, N.Y.
POST
EVENING - 623,245
WEEKEND - 354,797
MAR 2 9 1972
A Matter of
Diplomatic dealing and higher-level
statecraft often require attentive alert-
ness, but it has sometimes happened
that even the most astute leaders out-
smarted themselves because they under-
estimated their own intelligence.
Successive recent Presidents of the
. United States, for instance, either dis-
counted or downgraded perceptive pro-
fessional intelligence estimates about
Vietnam?the dismal details are fully
. recorded ? in some of the Pentagon
. papers?and it is clearly lamentable
that some of the more prescient counsel
` went no further than the files.
. There are many such reasons why
the Central Intelligence Agency's anal-.
Intelligence
yses of various foreign policy problems
should be more widely accessible, and
some of the organization's unhonored
prophets seem to agree. Former direc-
tor John A. McCone is apparently speak-
ing for them as well as himself in
supporting a pending bill that would
provide key Congressional committees
with CIA estimates and even some .
special surveys.
Since the American public is pay-
ing for this advice, its representatives
are fully entitled to more than a fleet-
ing look, and it is -quite possible that far
better informed Congressional opinion
would result?whatever the prevailing
view at the White House.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601
PHILADELPHIA, PA.
INQUIRER
? 463,503
S - 867,810
MAR 2 9 197a
Bill 'Would BareC/A.,.,Secrets
John A. McCone, a former Central Intelligence Agency
'director, has indorsed a bill that would require the CIA to
turn over its supersecret intelligence reports to Congress.
?- His indorsement indicates the CIA has abandoned its
:.1Ongstanding opposition to the circulation of its secrets out-
side the executive branch.
Aides to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee report-
ed that McCone had committed himself to testifying in favor
of the bill. The aides said the Nixon administration had reg-
istered its opposition to the bill, thereby preventing the cur-
rent CIA director, Richard M. Helms, a presidential appoin-
tee, from taking a position on it.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: DP80-01601R001400170001-1
Approved Fordl-ctie~01/6ARG.cakA
By. Thomas B. Ross
. Sun-Times Bureau
WASHINGTON ? John A.
McCone, a former Central In-
telligence Agency director, has
endorsed a bill that would re-
quire the CIA to turn over its
secret intelligence reports to
Congress.
His endorsement indicates
that the CIA has abandoned its
long-standing opposition to the
circulation of its secrets out-
side the executive branch.
Aide g to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee reported
Monday that McCone had com-
mitted himself to testifying in
favor of the bill during hear-
ings starting Tuesday. The
aides said the Nixon adminis-
tration had registered its
opposition to the bill, thereby
preventing the current CIA
director, Richard M. Helms, a
presidential appointee, from
taking a position on it.
Indirect support
But McCone's testimony is
sure to be interpreted as in-
direct CIA support of the bill.
Former directors of the agen-
cy, a loyal and tightly knit
group, rarely, if ever, take a
public position that the in-
cumbent director opposes.
The bill was introduced by
'Sen. John Sherman Cooper (R-
Ky.) last July, shortly after
the New York Times, the
Washington Post, the Sun-
Times and other newspapers
published the Pentagon pa-
pers. The papers revealed that
/the CIA consistently expressed
a skeptical view of Vietnam
from the Truman to the Nixon
administrations. Cooper and
other senators argued that
Congress might have blocked
the deep U.S. Involvement if it
had received the intelligence
estimates.
? Regular reports
Cooper's bill would require
the CIA to make regular re-
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
I
-01601
ports to the Foreign Relations
Committee, the Senate Armed
Services Committee, the House
Foreign Affairs Committee
and the House Armed Services
Committee. It also would re-
quire the CIA to provide spe-
cial information on request.
Tuesday's witnesses will be
Chester Cooper, former in- v
telligence analyst for the CIA
and the White House, and Her-
bert Scoville, former head of
the CIA's research division.
Sec. of State William P. Rog-
ers, who has assert e.d the
right to testify for the CIA, has
been asked to appear after the
Easter recess to present the
administration's position. He
may send a subordinate but
presumably not Ray Cline,
head of the department's bu-
il-eau of intelligence and re-
search.
An ITT director'
Cline, a former deputy CIA
direc to r for intelligence,
recently ? told the committee
that he favored the distribu-
tion of CIA reports to Congress,
provided the "sources and
methods of intelligence gather-
ing" were not jeopardized.
Cooper insists that his bill pro-
vides adequate protection.
McCone is scheduled to testi-
fy next month. It may be the
first in a series of appearances
before the committee. As a di-
rector of the International
Telephone & Telegraph Corp.,
he is a potential witness in the
committee's planned investi-
gation of the involvement 01
major corporations in U.Se
foreign policy.
According to memos re-
leased by columnist Jack An-
derson, McCone was given re-
ports on ITT negotiations with
the CIA to devise a plan for
blocking the installation of Sal-
vador Allende, a Marxist, as
President of Chile in 1970.
STATOTHR
/TEW:YORICIV.I1?-1777rg
Approved For Release 20011/713
1
THE ROAD
(? TO PEKING -
retile
urn. itr
talumph
u ?LI
n,?s
STATOTHR
STATOTHR
-
1601
By STAN CARTER .
NEWS Diplomatic Correspondent
Fifth of .a series
. .
1,1 NE of the eight black-bound loose-leaf volumes that
President Nixon studied in preparation for his journey
to Peking contained a top secret analysis by the Central
j Intelligence Agency of the strange and still only parti-
ally explained events in China last fall?and the effect
that the internal power struggle they revealed may
have on his summit talks with the surviving Communist
leaders.
What went on in China in mid-September is still shrouded
in mystery. Communist cadres in the provinces have been told
that Defense Minister Lin Piao?until then the regime's no. 2
man--was involved in a conspiracy to assassinate party Chair-
man Mao Tse-tung and that when toe plot failed, Lin and his
cohorts were killed in a plane crash in Mongolia suhile trying
to flee to the Soviet Union.
A British-built Trident jetliner, one of four purchased by
? China from Pakistan and used exclusively by high-ranking
? Chinese officers, did indeed crash in Mongolia, 100 miles be-
yond the Chinese border, on the night of Sept. 12. But American
analysts doubt that Lin was among the seven men and two
women whose bodies were recovered from the airplane, burned
beyond recognition.
? But it is clear that the power struggle has ended?at least
.for the time being?and that a moderate faction led by Premier
Chou En-lai triumphed over a radical faction led by Lin Piao.
'Lin and hundreds of his followers have beenn purged, but are
though to be still alive. ?
Whatever the reasons for the purge, the timing for it seems
to have been sparked by Chou's invitation to Nixon to visit the
People's Republic of China.
, Quarrel over resources
Despite ARREcniadifari Releasi%20411,06/0A-:
elusions are probably similar to those of analysts from other.
, government agencies and from experts outside the government.
. ?
For -exainple, Rand Corp. Sinologist William- W. Whitson
I has come up with a theory fitting the known facts. It suggests
that the power struggle was the culmination of a debate within
- the Chinese hierarchy over aiZocation of resources to China's
nuclear weapons program?and that Chou's victory over Lin
will make China less of a threat to U.S. allies in Asia in the
Immediate future than it has been considered in the past.
Whitson, a military specialist, is one of those China ex-
perts who does research for the government and also maintains
ties with the academic community. His new book, "The
Chinese High Command, 1927-1971?a History of Communist
Military Politics," will be published this spring.
According to Whitson, Lin Piao vigorously opposed last
year's decision by Chou?with Mao's concurrence?to reduce
tensions with the United States. . .
The reason was that Lin and his supporters in the Air,
Force and Navy needed the supposed American threat to
justify development of bigger and bigger nuclear weapons and
long-range 'missiles to deliver them.
The cost of China's nuclear and missile programs are 2%
of the still underdeveloped country's total national product--
so high that Whitson argues that "some people across the river
euphemism in Washington for CIA headquarters in Lan!4ley,
.Va.) say that we ought to encourage them to keep at it, because
it will make them go bankrupt."
Challenge to Lin
Whitson's contention is that Chou En-lai, in contrast to Lin,
recognized that the real threat to China was from Russia?
: which had massed one million troops on China's northern border
'and threatened a "surgical strike" against Chinese nuclear in-
stallations?instead of from the United States, which the premier
'could see was in fact withdrawing from Southeast Asia.
To cope with the Soviet threat, China needed tactical nuclear
*weapons as well as more modern conventional armament?not
necessarily long-range ICBMs. Therefore, it is Whitson's belief
that Chou wanted to slow down the costly advanced weapor s
program and thus welcomed Nixon's overtures to..end the 23-
year-old confrontation between the United States and Chino.
- But the invitation to Nixon presented a challenge to Lin and
the generals associated with pat strategic planning. Whitson
pits it this way:
'"To many of the Senior officers of thesecond geher-
. :
ation, probably including: Lin Piao, Wu Fa-hsien, Li Tso-p'eng
and Huang Yung-sherg, the historical image of the United
States as the principal adversary most heavily armed with nu-
clear weapons targeted against China must have been the cor-
nerstone of their premises for strategic planning and weapons
development.
"President Nixon's visit to China could not have been a wel-
come shift in the image that had presumably guided their
strategic thinking for 20 years." .
Smaller bangs
Since the mid-1960s, China has exploded 13 nuclear devides,
including three hydrogen bombs with yields of three megatons
each, in 1968, 1969 and 1970. But the last two tests, in November,
1971 and January of this year, were of smaller devices with
yields of 20 kilotons or less?the size of the Hiroshima A-bomb.
According to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, the
latest two tests could either have been of triggers for larger
thermonuclear weapons or of prototypes of comparatively small,
tactical nuclear warheads. If they were the latter, it would tend
to confirm Whitsonls theory that 'Chou, after defeating Lin. has ?
shifted priorities to concentrate on medium and intermediate
range missiles instead of a costly intercontinental inissile -
arsenal.
"Such an emphasis would provide an immediate deterrent
..
against the Soviet Union," Whitson says. -It would also promise
the greatest intercontinental utility once an appropriate sub- ?
marine or two had been built."
If Whitson is right, this will be disconcerting to U.S. mil-
itary planners, who have advocated construction of an anti-"
ballistic missile defense system for protection of the United
States against Chinese ICBM's expected to be operational as
-early as 1975, as much as against the nuclear-tipped Soviet
intercontinental rockets already in their underground silos.
Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird acknowledged to Congress
ENOMAT O IfigtVins79/P or C hina, or how
et_lhe strategic
? I ?
that threat will evolve through the 1970s." But Laird said the
-
/2)
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601
ST/9kTOTHR
KILWAUK,EE VilSC.
JOURNAL,
,IVO p7)
359,036
S - 537,875
.-Cloalr, and:. Dagger Hicietran From Longress
'Tile- US intelligence network, a
hydralike structure of vhieh the
CentralyIntellig?ence Agency is a
1 major portion, has always been a
headache for the executiVe and
i Congress. For the White House
there has been the preblem of
management and coordination;
for Congress the problem of de-
termining accountability.
' President Nixon has attempted
to solve his management problem.
; Last week he announced a reorga-
nization that would elevate CIA
NJ Director Richard Helms to a posI-
tion of super-cli-ordinator of all
intelligence activities. He tied the
,
whole apparatus more tightly into
the National Security cii
-through a new National Security
'Council Intelligence Committee
headed by presidential adviser
;
Kissinger. Presumably the White
iIousehopes to be better able to
keep its thumb on intelligence op-
erations and budgets, to suppress
the petty jealousies that exist be-
tween such units as the FBI and
:the CIA and to cut down on the
...competitive duplication of work
done by various intelligence' orga-
nizations both ? in and out of the
military. It is a valiant attempt.
Former Defense Secretary Mc-
Nainara tried it within the Penta-
gon structure and achieved only a
? modicum of .success.
The administration move s,
however, do not solve the needs of
the 'honey granting body, Con-
gress. In fact,. Senators Fulbright
and Symington Thursday ex-
pressed strong fears that tucking
the intelligence community more
firmly into the White House struc-
ture will withdraw it even further
from congressional monitoring.
Their point is well taken. Right
now there are few requirements
for the CIA to tell CongreSs what
it is 'doing. Its budget is secreted
in other agencies. There is every.
reason to believe that Kissin-
ger will refuse to testify before
Congress .as he has before, claim-
ing executive privilege. Tradition-
al congressional checks are miss-
ing. And that is a dangerous situ-
ation.
-
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-.RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
Win P.;131(
Approved For Release 2001/04/C4I:VdU-RDP80-01601
BY STEVVAFrf ALSO.I4
WASHINGTON?It is highly likely that
one of these days soon, probably before
Christmas,. quite possibly before Thanks-
giving, CIA director Richard Helms will
call the White House and ask for an
urgent appointment with the President:
A great deal will then depend on what-
lIelms tells President. Nixon, and what
'President Nixon delides to do about it.
Helms, of course, is the No. I. man in
the U.S. intelligence community. The
intelligence community is braced for
"the other shoe to drop." The other shoe
is-a series of -Soviet missile tests that the
intelligence specialists are sure?rather
mysteriously sure?will take place be-
fore the end of this year, most probably .
in November or earl Y December. .
These tests will tell a great deal
about the real purpose of the very
great Soviet investind-it in offensive
strategic weapons. This investment is
the first shoe, and it is 'symbolized by
the. missile silos?Tholc?s," they are called
in the intelligence trade?that the Rus-
sians have been constructing with ex-
traordinary urgency throughout this
year. The tests \\;ill show what kind of
missilc?s the Russians intend to put in
their holes.
PEACE AND THE HOLES
This is not, admittedly, a subject that
much interests most people in the pres-
ent, curious mood of this country. But it
is a subject that has to interest the in-
telligence specialists?and the Presi-
dent, too. For what goes into the Rus-
sian holes may well determine whether
or not it is rational to hope for what the
President likes to call "a generation of
peace."
The facts about the holes are as fol-
lows (and these facts are indeed facts,
for the Pentagon's reconnaissance satel-
lites bring back pictures of the holes
almost as detailed. as a picture of a
building across the street). A total of
91 new holes has been dug so far this
-yeir. Twenty-five of these new holes
aIC 'very large?larger than the holes
that used to be dug for the huge, 25-
megaton SS-9 missile. Sixty-six of the
boles are somewhat smaller than the
regular SS-9 holes but larger than the
holes for the 1-megaton SS-11 missile.
These smaller holes are dug in a big
drcle, with ten missiles to a circle. In
STATOTHR
LI) ?
?
.been dug. None of the holes has a's: yet
been fitted with a missile, and the ex-
perts do not expect them to be opera-
tional until, about July 1972.
There are no doubt innumerable pa-
pers marked Top Secret filled with de-
tails about the Russian holes, but the
essential facts are as stated above.
These faets make it possibh5? for any
reasonably intelligent reader of this
magazine to be his own intelligence
analyst. What are the holes for?
WHAT ARE THEY FOR?
R is very unlikoly that they are sim-
ply for more first-generation SS-Os and
SS-11s. Otherwise, the missiles would
already be in their holes. They could
be for improved versions of the SS-9
and the SS-11: Or they could be for
entirely new weapons.
, It seems reasonable to suppose that
the Russians want to do .one thing to
improve the SS-9, and another thing to
improve the SS-11. The SS-9, or an en-
tirely new version of the big missile,
could be provided with multiple war-
heads, or "NfIlWed." Because its war-
head is so immense, the missile Could
be 1\.11RVed six, or even ten times over.
Given sufficient accuracy, even a rela-
tively small number of NIIRVed multi-
megaton missiles could be used to
destroy, in a first strike, this country's
main strategic deterrent?our- 1,000
land-basecl Minuteman missiles.
Greatly improved accuracy for the
SS-] 1, or some new version of such a
missile, would have -a similar effect. The
SS-11 is an "anti-city" weapon; it is only
roughly accurate, since only rough ac-
curacy is required to destroy a city
with a 1-megaton warhead. But if it
could be rendered accurate enough to
dig a Minuteman missile out of its con-
crete silo, then it too would become a
direct threat to our strategic deterrent.
How about the enormous new .holes??
The reader's guess may be. as good as
the specialists', for the specialists do
not pretend to have the. answer. These
huge holes could be foii hardened con-
trol centers. Or they could be for some
new kind of offensive strategic missile,
perhaps filled with penetration aids to
? blind the U.S. defense, perhaps with an
? enormous warhead designed . to black
out the defense's radar and. Control sys-
STATOTHR ?
most as much as they tell the Russians
about such factors -as accuracy, range
and niegatonnag,e. Suppose the tests
'show (a) a MIRVccl SS-9-type missile,
(b) greatly improved accuracy for the
SS-11-type missile, and (e) an entirely,
new offensive strategic missile of im-
mense size. Even if the .tests showed
only one or two of these things, Rich-
ard helms would have to ask for that
urgent appointment with the President.
What the President do then?
. Already, it is too late to talk about
missile parity." The Russians have
1,600 intercontinental missiles against
1,051 American missiles, and in terms
of missile megatonnage, they have be-
tween five and ten times the thermonu-
clear capacity we have: Their anti-bal-
listic-missile complex is fully operational
in the Moscow area and being urgently
Wended, whereas our ABM system
will not be operational for several years.
A NEW CONFRONTATION
They are ready to produce. an entire-
ly .new swept-wing attack bomber, with
an undoubted "anti-U.S. attack capabil-
ity," whereas our B-52s are Model T
bombers, terribly vulnerable to the new
SA-5 Soviet anti-aircraft. The Soviet
Y-class nuclear submarine fleet of 41.
boats now equals Ours, and instead of
halting production, the Russians have,
doubled their production capacity. The
Soviet conventional fleet is already in
several categories superior to ours.
The new Soviet missile tests could
indicate at least the serious possibility
that the Soviets are building up for a
new eyeball-to-eyeball nuclear con-
frontation, like the 1962 Cuban crisis,
in which it would be our turn to blink.
The likely locale of the confrontation is
obvious?the Middle East; It is easy to
dismiss this possibility as mere Pentagon.
propaganda. But it is also silly.
. The intelligence analysts, including,
the Pentagon s, have consistently un-
derestimated the Soviet Missile pro--
gram. As for the President, his political
future may be at stake. If he were. to
abandon hope for successful SALT
.talks and ask for very large new appro-
priations to regain nuclear parity with
? the Russians, he might well. be throwing
away his chance of re-election, in this
country's present mood.
the middle of a half dozen or so of tems..Nobody knows. So what would the President do? If
these circles, a very big hole, bigger After the expected tests, a lot more some Of the gloomier analysts are right,
than any miAile silo am-.'built his will loe known for The tests- tell us al- what will the President dol.'
pprove For Re ease 0 1/03/04 : CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
= - - ?
Eiilo,yo.cfc,:fc STATOTHR
Approved For Release 2001/03104bC1AfRDP8.91016O11RIFO
Mifsile Myths ? I
However, later, after testimony by Secretary Rogers
and CIA Pirector Helms, he retreated to the positimf
? o that the Russians were acquiring the forces that would(
' 9 It' '2.11--n I provide theft with such a capability. _ ?
Lt, tat it. o
,
Although .we have no. way of diVining :Soviet in-
'13Y Her beTt Scoville Jr.
tentions, we must attempt to visualize a first-strike
? policy from the Soviet point of view: We must remem-
- ? ?
ber that a first strike that ,is only 50 percent or even
Now that the US and the .USSR have agreed at the
95 _percent effective is a disaster for the Soviet Union,
highest level...to "concentrate this year on working
since few - or even one - thermonuclear explosions on
out an agreement to limit the deployment of ABMs"
its cities in retaliation would be a catastrophe. Knock-
and "to agree on certain measures with respect to the
ing out all our"Minutentan missiles but leaving us with
limitations of offensive strategic weapons," it is timely
a strong retaliatory force .of submarine missiles and
to clear away some of the myths which have been
bombers is only an -invitation :to national suicide.
hampering success at SALT and providing fuel for
Even if all our intercontinental bombers were also
the arms race. One. such' 'myth' has been the widely
destroyed by Soviet submarine missiles, we would
trumpeted charges 'that the Russians were preparing,
still be left with d retaliatory capability which could
a first strike awlinst the US -- a strategic attack on this
devastate the .USSR. Thus, if the :Soviets are serious
country which would destroy a .sufficient proportion
in attempting to develop a first-strike capability, they
? .of our strategic retaliatory forces that .we would be
must find. some way fo neutralize our Polaris sub-
either unable .or 'unwilling to respond. If the Soviets
'marines, to say nothing of our bombers based on
or we came to believe that. they had this capability,
carriers or overseas.
then our deterrent, the heart of our strategic security,
While the Soviets have a. modest. anti-submarine
would have lost iB credibility. Nuclear war would
warfare' program, they could. not _have. a force which
? have become more likely and our vulnerability to nu-
- could destroy the Polaris fleet in this decade or prob-
ably the next and have apparently not even made a '
HERBERT ScOVILLE, JR. is Chairmalt op the Federation of major, effort to have one. Their only protection from
American Scientists' Strategic Weapons Panel. ? For- Polaris missile in :the foreseeable future would be
? merly he was.?Deputy Director for Research, CIA and.
through an extensive nationwide ABM system that
Assistant Dicector for Science and Technology _of the could shoot down essentially all _retaliatory missiles;
Arms Control and. Disarmament Agency. Part II of yet strangely, some time before Secretary Laird an-.
? ?this report will app?ear in a forthcoming issue.
- . flounced the Soviet intention to achieve a first-strike ,
clear, blackmail a reality. This fear or.' a first strike
capability, the Russians stopped the deployment of
against our. 'Minuteman ICBMs was a major factor in their only ABM system, that around NilosCow. They
President Nixon's previous reluctance, (which now .1;ave only recently, more than three years later, resumed
: appears to have been partially 'overcome) to nego-
.that deployment, but they could not have in this .de-
time an ABM agreement Without, a simultaneous cade, and probably never, an operational sysiern which
? tation on offensive weapons. [Lard said September 18 they could count on for protection from completely
that ? the Russians in the last 10- months have under- unacceptable damage from the Polaris fleet alone.
??taken, with "tremendous' momentum," a- buildup
The continued Soviet construction .of. about 50 to .
of both land- and sea-based missiles. When Laird gets 60 very large 55-9' missile launchers a year was the
? specific in .his report to Congress next January on the primary evidence used to support the conclusion that
military budget, there will. be, he predicts, 110 further the Soviets were seeking a firSt-strike capability. It
talk of .budget cutting, for' -the% American people don't was feared that about 500 of these missiles, each
to-ant to be "militarily inferior." Government officials, equipped with three' MIRVs (multiple independently
it is repo. tied,. say that 80 ICBM silos are being built in targetable reentry vehicles); could destroy 95 percent
- the Soviet Union, that the Soviet ICBMs already out- :of the US Minuteman force in a first strike. The
number ours - 1500' to -1054 - and that they have
or :Russians had tested the '55-9 with three reentry vehicles
soon will have 25 operational missile-firing subma- begirming in August 1968, and US defense authorities ?
? rines (the qs has 41). Numbers, of course, say nothing suggested in .1969 that these were designed to knock
- definitive about a first strike capability or . intent. out our Minuteman silos. They further argued that
The Editors], ? . ,the only logical explanation for the continuing 55-9
. Secretary Laird first raised the first-strike ? alarm in. buildup was a Soviet desire to achieve a first-strike
? justifying the ,Saieguard ABM when he said on March capability: As time passed, ? this assumption evolved
21, 19,69 that the Soviet Union is "going for a first from theory to unquestioned gospel. ?
strike, capability, and there is no question about it." But is the desire to obtain a first-strike capability
Approved For Release-2001/03/04thcalAyRDRSO-046001ROP144QFP90-ttr the
. STATOTHR STATOTHR
-iepte?tbeAP*Ved For Rale:Jager-
withdrawal from 'V ietnam. We should
more vigorously .and creatively' limit
massive nuclear arms expenditures. And
we should refuse to give id and sup-
port to military dictatorships in coun-
tries like Greece and Pahistam
200/033/10414-)tWRIaP8b4c601R00
I 1087
Our most important economic task is bill was approved for reporting in. the
the restoration of full employment. ButCommittee on Armed Set -vices by a vote
,.. .
the President's proposals will not do this. of 10 to 0.
- Our. employment rate is more than 6 per- . Mr. President, the acting ma j art t.y
cent----more than '1 percent in California. leader has mentioned to me the proposi-?
Five million men and women are with-- lion Of getting unanimous conaent with
out jobs in America. I support Mr. reference to SOMe amendments to be
Nixon's basic view that we must institute Proposed on Monday, so that they beSTATO
tax incentives to help create jobs. But voted on on Monday. I am -glad we can .
? .that alone will not be enough. The 500,000 get started on these unanimous-consent
new jobs that he expects his tax package agreements, and the acting majority
to create in the next 12 months will still leader may present that unanimous-con-
leave 4 l/2 million Americans unemployed; sent request when he wishes to. Of course
5.4 percent, of our labor force will be we would like to look at those amend-
without work. . ments or know their substance before-
The President spoke in his September band. .
9 address of creating 100 million jobs in ?As a general proposition, the purpose
10 years. What we really need are 5 mil-- o'f the committee is to get this bill pre-
? sented. rather fully and to get into the
'lion jobs right now.
If we are to move rapidly toward full RECORD today, some of the general
employment, the President's tax package speeches and overall explanations. Some
, should therefore be improved. The in- Members who were planning to speak in
credit- should be structured connection with the explanation of the
bill cannot be -here today, but they win
be here very early next week. With the
report that is presented here, which is
-extraordinarily complete, and with the
explanations to be made today and Mon-
day, I think that the full matter will be
before the Senate. I hope we can raca?e----
I will not say rapidly?but with reason-
able dispatch, in the consideration of
these amendments, and dispose of the.am
Mr. President, the committee is Pre-
pared to enter into almost any unani-
mous-consent agreement that, may be
proposed as to limitations of time. Of
Course, there is always room for interprea .
tation as to what may be considered '.
reasonable under the circumstances and
'? on the:subject matter.
Mr. President, I have a unanimous-
eansent request to make, now, which is -
the usual one made on bills of this kind.
Preliminarily, although the 'bill be-
fore the Senate is the House bill--tne
House passed the bill and referred it to
CONCLUSION OF MORNING
BUSINESS
- Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. Pres.-
ident, is there further morning business?
The PRIZIDING OFFICER. --Is there
further morning business? If not, morn-
ing business is closed.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
A message from the House of -Repre-
sentatives, by lvIr. Berry, one of its read-
ing clerks, announced that the House had
Passed a. bill (H.R. 0727) to regulate the
estment tax
dumping of material in the oceans,
. to encourage the development of systems coastal, and other waters, and for other
-
e and services that will meet our domestic purposes, in which it requested the eon-
needs. We should give top priority to tax Clarence of the Senate. . ?
Incentives that will encourage civilian %----- .
applications of aerospace and military 1
-
technology. This will allow our defense MILITARY PROCUREMENT APPRO-
industries to diversify, creating new jobs PRIATIONS All THOR:TZ ATIONS, 1972
for those who had beenthrown out of The PRESIDING OFFICER jr.
' work. (SaoNo) r Under the previous- order, the
I am disturbed by the marked dispar- Chair lays before the Senate the 'infin-
ity between the tax incentives proposed ished business, which the clerk will state.
for the Nation's producers, and those de- The legislative clerk read as follows:
signed to benefit its many millions of eon- -
H.R. 0687, a bill to authorize appro-
.
SUreerS. I beliCVe COnSumer tax relief priations during, the fiscal year 1972 for pro-
should hi a increased over and above the curement of aircraft, missiles, naval vessels,
$50 acceleration in personal exempl*ns tracked combat vehicles, torpedoes, and other
that the President has preposcd. His pro- VIE:Iep011S, find research, development, test, and
?gram reprra.ents only a 7-pereent de- evaluation for the Armed Forces, and to
crease in in COnSUMer taxes. A 10--percent scribe the authorized personnel strength of
cut would surely not be unreasonable, es- the Selected Reserve of each Reserve compo-
nent of the Armed POrCOS, and for other
peeially in view of the impending in-
creases in social security taxes. -purposes,
. .
, I cannot support the President's repeal The Senate resumed the consideration
- of the 7-percent automobile excise tax, af the bill.?
.The floating of time dollar and the invest-
ment tax :Credit already give the automo-
bile manufacturers substantial relief. I
can see no reason to provide the auto in-
dustry with additional extraordinary
. benefits, particularly when other sectors the roll.
of the economy, .such as aVrOSpacp, have Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I ask Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
suffered far more serious setbacks during unanimous consent 1-hat the order for the
-
sent that the committee amendment in .
the current recession. I propose instead .curmnni. call be rescinded. the nature of a substitute be agreed to,
that the automobile excise tax be main- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without . and as agreed to he considered original
- tamed, and that its proceeds be placed objection, his so ordered. text for the purpose of further amend-
- in a fund to be used for the development Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, am moist..
I rec- ?
of urban mass transit. In this way, we ognizec-1?"The PRESIDING- OFFICER. Is there
? .can. improve our Nation's transportation The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- objection? The Chair hears no objec-
systems, boost employment, and render ator from Mississippi is recognized. tion, and it is so ordered.
tremendous assistance to our cities with- Mr. STEN-NIS: Mr. President, what is Mr. STEN:NIS. I thank the Presiding
out causing further damage to the en- the pending measure before the Senate? ()Meer and I thank the Senat?o That is
a.. ? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The a step, forward, even if it is the usual
a Pending measure before the Senate is customary unanimous-consent request
H.R. 8687, the military procurement au- that IS made, .
thorization bill. Mr. President, I believe that this bill,
Mr. STENNIS. I thank the Presiding as reported, outlines an austere and pru-
Offieer. , dent program for military procurement
Mr. President, I wish to thank 1-he act- and for resource and'clevelopment which
ing majority leader as well as the acting should be funded now'. The total re.- ?
minoaity leader for their cooperation in quests which the Cernmittee colL;idered
getting this Matt,er arranged and for the in this bill amounted to $22,188,337,000.
time I have had this morning while other The committee is recommending to the
matters were being disposed of. - Senate an authorization of 821,018,182,-
We begin debate today on the annual 000, or a decrease of $1,-109.855,000. This
military procurement bill. While varying is a committee reduction of 5.3 percent
views of individual COntlnittee members from the total budget request consid-
aro reflected in certain amendments, the ered. e
? Mr. BYRD of West.Virginia. Mr. Pres-
our committee, and we considered and
ident, M
suggest the absence of a quoru.
reported the House bill----eVerything
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk .? after the enacting clause was embraced
will call the roll.
in a substitUte which is 'offered here as
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
an amendment.
.Viloninen? .
Aa the price for the President's tax
package, he has proposed delaying of
family assistance and revenue sharing,
continuing the freezing of Federal funds
for such purposes as mass transit, urban
renewal, public works, and health care,
and to cutting back the Federal work
force and foreign aid.
The President's cuts have been made
in the wrong places, I believe. .?
We need not sacrifice vital domestic
? programs in order to place a lid on infla-
tion. We should be cutting back unnec-
essary military and strategic arms ex-
penditures.- We seek to accelerate our
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
COIZGRESSTONA1.1 QU4RTINT.A7
Approved For RegfoOptik1/0A4Ytilfii-(152DP80-41130-1-Ril
CIA: CONGtil]SS IN D
Since ? the Central Intelligence Agency was given
authority in 1949 to operate without.. normal legislative
oversight, an uneasy tension has existed between an un-
informed Congress and an uninformative CIA.
In the last two decades nearly 200 bills aimed at
making the CIA more accountable to the legislative
branch have been introduced. Two such bills have been
reported from committee. None has been adopted.
The push is on again. Some members of Congress
are insisting they should know more about the CIA and
j-about what the CIA knows. The clandestine military
operations in Laos run by the CIA appear to .be this
year's impetus.
Sen. Stuart Symington -(D Mo.), a member of the
Armed Services Intelligence Operations Subcommittee
and chairman of the Foreign Relations subcommittee
dealing with U.S. commitments abroad, briefed the
Senate June 7 behind closed doors on how deeply the
CIA was involved' in the Laotian turmoil, tie based his
briefing on .a staff report. (Weehly Report p. 1709, 1660,
1268)
Ile told the Senate in that closed session: "In all my
committees there is no real knowledge of what is going on
in Laos.?We do not know the cost of the bombing. We do
not know about the .people we maintain there. It is a
secret war."
As a member of two key subcommittees dealing with
the activities of the CIA, Symington should be privy to
more classified information about the agency than most
other members of Congress. But Symington told the Sen-
ate he. had to dispatch two committee staff members to
Laos in order to find out what the CIA was doing.
If Symington does not know what the CIA has been
doing, then what kind of oversight function does Congress
exercise over the super-secret organization? (Secrecy
fact sheet, Weehly Report p. 1785)
A Congressional Quarterly examination of the over-
sight system exercised by the legislative branch, a study
of sanitized secret documents relating to the CIA and
interviews with key staff members and members of Con-
gress indicated that the real power to gain knowledge
about. CIA activities and expenditures rests in the bands
Of four powerful committee chairmen and several key
members of their committees?Senate and House Armed
Services and Appropriations Committees.
he extent to which these men exercise their power
in ferreting out the details of what the CIA does with its
secret appropriation determines the quality of legislative
oversight on this executive agency that Congress voted
into existence 24 years ago.
The CIA Answers to...
As established by the National Security Act .of 1947
(PL 80-253), the Central Intelligence Agency was ac-
countable to the President and the ?NalIbnal Security
\ BO U`iACTVTUS, .2')Ei N Dh 1 G
STATOTHR
Council. In the original Act there was no language which
excluded the agency from scrutiny by Congress, but also
no provision which required such examination.
? To clear up any confusion as to the legislative intent
of the 1947 law, Congress passed the 1949 Central Intel-
ligence Act (PL 81-110) which exempted the CIA from all
federal laws requiring disclosure of the "functions, names,
official titles, salaries or numbers of personnel" employed
by the agency. The law gave the CIA director power to
spend money "without regard to the provisions of law
and regulations relating to the expenditure of govern-
ment-funds." Since the CIA became a functioning organi-
zation in 1949, its budgeted funds have been submerged
into the general accounts of other government agencies,
hidden from the scrutiny of the public and all but a se-
lect group of ranking members of Congress. (Congress
and the Nation Vol. I, p. 306, 249)
Tlii SENATE
In the Senate, the system by which committees
check on CIA activities and budget requests is straight-
forward. Nine men?on two committees?hold positions
of seniority which allow them to participate in the regular
annual legislative oversight function. Other committees
are briefed by the CIA, but only on. topical matters and
not on a regular basis.
Appropriations. William W. Woodruff, counsel
for the Senate Appropriations Committee' and the only
staff man for the oversight subcommittee, *explained that
when the CIA comes before the five-man subcommittee,
more is discussed than just the CIA's budget.
"We look to the CIA for the best intelligence on the
Defense Department budget that you can get," Woodruff
told Congressional Quarterly. He said that CIA Director
Richard Helms provided the subcommittee with his
estimate of budget needs for all government intelligence
operations. ?
Woodruff explained that although the oversight
subcommittee was responsible for reviewing the CIA bud- ?
get, any -substantive legislation dealing with the agency
would originate In the Armed Services Committee, not
Appropriations.
? No transcripts are kept when the CIA representative
(usually Behns) testifies before the subcommittee. Wood-
ruff said the material: covered in the hearings was so
highly classified that any transcripts would have to be
kept under armed guard 24 hours a day. Woodruff does
take detailed notes on the sessions, however, which are
held for him by the CIA. "All I have to do is call," he
said, "and they're on my desk in an hour."
Armed Services. "The CIA budget itself does not
legally -require any review by Congress," said T. Edward
Braswell, chief counsel for the Senate Armed Services
Committee and the only staff man used by the Intelli-
gence Operations Subcommittee.
Approved For Release 2001/03/04: CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1
rg.t1t5nued
z
z
DETRoiT,
pEvis Approved For Release 2001/0
.... 592,616
627,086
Au C..
STATOTHR
1.--? I -a ?
By GEORGE KENTERA ?