Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
January 9, 2001
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
August 17, 1972
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP80-01601R001400170001-1.pdf4.71 MB
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 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 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- 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 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 "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 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 ?