MISINFORMATION ON DISINFORMATION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00587R000100010028-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 25, 2011
• Sequence Number: 28
• Publication Date: July 16, 1985
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/02/25: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100010028-2
ARV!I.F A??EARED WASHINGTON TIMES
r' 1 ' r 16 July 1985
Misinformation on dismiormarion
recently read a review, pub-
lished in a certain magazine to
be identified later, of a book,
Dezinformatsia, by two
respected academics, Professor
Richard H. Shultz Jr. of 'Rifts Uni-
vbcsity's Fletcher School of Diplo-
macy and Roy Godson of
Georgetown University. The review
chide the following serious charges
against this book:
? The book was said to use "spe-
?ious arguments to prove the obvi-
01$."
. ? It misrepresents reality to prove
a simplistic point.
? It is "misguided;' exhibits a
"total lack of understanding" about
Clausewitz, shows "a superficial
understanding of current history
and the Soviet Union:'
? It didn't "fairly report" the con-
tent of Soviet journals, it has treated
the subject "irresponsibly," it suffers
from "extraordinarily naive
assumptions" and "erroneous his-
tory"
? And the book was said "ulti-
mately" to serve "neither
scholarship nor the national inter-
est."
Such harsh language about the
published work of academics can be
defined as a form of character assas-
sination, since it questions their
honor as teachers and researchers.
For my part, to be even harsher, I
would say that this review could,
with little editing, have appeared in
a Soviet publication.
Now, then, would you like to guess
in what left-wing, pro-Soviet, pro-
gressive journal this book review
appeared? If you're very smart and
sophisticated, you might try and
guess, but you'd be wrong. I'll have
to tell you:
This book review appeared in an
official magazine of the government
STAT
of the United States, a magazine pub-
lished by the Central Intelligence
Agency - yes, by the CIA under the
supervision of the Deputy Director-
ate ate for Intelligence that is responsi-
ble for all CIA analyses of world
affairs.
The publication, a quarterly
called Studies in Intelligence, is an
"in-house" publication. It is not dis-
tributed publicly since some articles
are classified; others, such as the
book review I am discussing, are
unclassified. The essay-review, in
the magazine's winter 1984 issue,
was written by Avis Boutell, a CIA
analyst, who works for the Foreign
Broadcast Information Service.
When I read the Shultz-Godson
book some months ago to prepare
my own favorable review, I found it
a cool, scholarly examination of
Soviet propaganda and disinfor-
mation strategies. So did a number
of other distinguished Sovietologists
and publicists, such as Professors
Adam Ulam and Uri Ra'anan, Dr.
Robert Conquest, and Professor Sid-
ney Hook, who wrote the laudatory
introduction.
The book, now in its third edition,
included what I regarded as highly
informative interviews with defec-
tors who had specialized, while in
the service of the KGB in the
U.S.S.R. and Czechoslovakia, in
"active measures." The Soviet
strategy of "active measures"
involves, for the most part, covert
disinformation as "a non-attributed
or falsely attributed communica-
tion, written or oral, containing
intentionally false, incomplete, or
misleading information (frequently
combined with true information),
which seeks to deceive, misinform,
and/or mislead the target:' accord-
ing.to.the Shultz-Godson definition.
In other words, the book
describes a panoply of Soviet tactics
to mantpu at e tt e. metia in the
democracies, the use of "agents of
influence:' sponsorship of clandes-
tine radio broadcasts, and use of
international front organizations.
These strategies and tactics are
excellently described in this impor-
tant book,
Not only is Studies in Intelligence
an official government magazine,
but it also is published by a U.S.
secret service. It therefore must be
assumed that whatever is publistyed
therein represents the official vow
of the CIA or, at the very least, the
point of view of CIA analysts. As an
analogy, a Voice of America edito-
rial, for example, must be approved
by responsible State Department
officials before it can be read on the
air.
If the CIA book review reflects
the political culture of the CIA and
the world in which its analysts live,
then some of the egregious errors
about Soviet intentions made by the
CIA over the past 15 or more years,
errors which have been publicly dis-
cussed in the press and by the two
congressional committees on intelli-
gence oversight, become under-
standable.
One could take apart, paragraph
by paragraph, this CIA book review
to demonstrate its use of the rhetoric
of overkill.
Here I want merely to deal with
the political approach of a CIA ana-
lyst whose views, no matter what the
CIA might say, seem to harmonize
with the agency's ethos, which I pray
is not that of William J. Casey, CIA
director. That this review got past
Mr. Casey, I can understand; he has
more important problems to deal
with. But isn't there somebody in his
organization who has the wit, under-
standing, and common decency to
realize that the language used to dis-
cuss the Shultz-Godson book might
be better suited to a review of Hit-
ler's Mein Kampf?
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/02/25: CIA-RDP91-00587R000100010028-2