LETTER TO MAJOR GENERAL JAMES H. WALSH FROM ALLEN W. DULLES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 21
• Document Creation Date: December 14, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 22, 2002
• Sequence Number: 56
• Publication Date: June 15, 1958
• Content Type: LETTER

A ro
pp v
STAT
v/basic
1 -Ml
1 - IR
1 - Reading
Fdd 12 June 58
Orig ./ Addressee
Distributi
O/DCIt
ea i-or Kelease zuuzrviris : LIA-rcuruUt U-IbibKJJU"IZ0004UU3b-b
~,fp?.S`~ ~o _ cam.
isJUN,
sic
 a~ c xy.
'Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200V4105~8LS
ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF, INTELLIGENCE
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON 25, D. C.
9 June 1958
You may be aware of Dr. Herb Dinerstein's
writing on Soviet strategy. In January 1958
issue of Foreign Affairs he summed up on Soviet
writings on surprise a ack, preventative war,
and pre-emptive attack.
General Kurasov wrote the enclosed answer
in 27 April Red Star.
In the Aesopian tongue of the Communist he
makes a handy case for Lenin teaching the offen-
sive.
Sincerely,
Q
JAME
ES? M:' yALSR
,
Maj~'or General, USAF
As`si tant Chief of Staff,
telligence
Mr. Allen W. Dulles
Director, Central Intelligence Agency
2430 E Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-6
ON THE QUESTION OF THE PRE-EMPTIVE BLOW
BY GENERAL OF THE ARMY V. KURASOV
Red Sar, April 27, 1958)
Herbert S. Dinerstein
T-87
May 12, 1958
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-6
JC0 y-/9l",,v~-e
 i i
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040
5-12-58
U.
This article was published in the open press and not in a
restricted journal. As one would expect, therefore, its aim
is clearly political and propagandistic. It does not contain
any genuine discussion or thesis about military matters. Its
chief significance lies in the use of the term "pre-emptive"
(uprezhdaioshchii). This is the first time, as far as the
translator is aware, that this word has appeared in the open
Soviet press, though it has appeared several times in Military
!Moug. In that restricted journal the term has been found
only once in association with the word "preventive" (prevent-ivnyi),
and then for the purpose of making a clear distinction between
preventive and pre-emptive war. In the present Red article,
however, the two words are used interchangeably and both kinds
of war are condemned as "means of attack and of unleashing
war ... Incompatible with the peaceful policy of the Soviet
state, and ... with socialist ideology."
On the face of it the article is useless as a source of
information about actual Soviet military calculations. It is
it polemical production. But the mere fact that the terms
"preventive" and "pre-emptive" are both used, where one would
have been sufficient for the writer's purpose (since he
implies they mean about the same thing), indicates that the
writer, a general, was well aware of the distinction
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 p 7
p 7
5-12-58
iii.
normally made between the terms, i.e., a preventive war is one
initiated to forestall a somewhat remote threat, at a time and
place of the initiator's choosing, a pre-emptive war is one
initiated to forestall an Imminent threat upon receipt of
unequivocal warning.
That the writer was aware of this distinction may be
deduced also from his treatment of my article in Foreign Affairs.
He vigorously denies the article's conclusion that "since 1955
the strategy of pre-emptive war, i.e., dealing the first blow
against the opponent, has been officially adopted in the
Soviet Union." He himself has equated "pre-emptive" with
"preventive" for the purposes of propaganda, and he positively.
denies that this kind of war, war by surprise, is being
planned by the Soviet Union. He tries to demonstrate by
quotations that the U.S. Is planning to "unleash" a war by
surprise. He completely ignores the fact that the Forei n
Affairs article quoted a Soviet disclaimer of any intention
to undertake preventive war, and he does not mention my
judgment that this disclaimer way well have been sincere, at
least in current conditions.
General I(urasov, then, achieved his propaganda purpose,
not by falsification of the material he quotes, but by
skillful selection and omission. In spite of his attempt to
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R0012000400f,6*y
5-12-5b
iv.
obscure the distinction between the two terms mentioned, the
very fact that he used them both strongly implies that he
himself did not equate them in his own mind.
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056 f,87
5-12-58
1.
The basic problem of modern times which agitates all
peoples is the question of war and peace.
Despite the peaceful policy of the co-existence of states
with different social structures, which the Soviet Union
pursues, the reactionary circles of the imperialistic states,
not reckoning with the will of the peoples, continues a policy
directed toward the preparation of new aggressive wars.
In the Western bourgeois press, especially in the military
press, questions are discussed connected with the preparation
of and the methods for unleashing a future war. In this
connection basic attention is devoted to the problem of sur-
prise attack. In recent years the questions of unleashing
"preventive war" and the question of dealing pre-emptive
blows with the mass employment of nuclear weapons have been
raised with increasing frequency.
The theories of surprise attack and of lightning and
preventive wars are not new in the imperialistic states. They
were actually employed in the wars of the twentieth century.
As is known, during the Second World War iitlerite Germany
and imperialist Japan started war by surprise attack.
The appearance of new kinds of weapons, atomic and
hydrogen bombs, ballistic and winged rockets, has resulted
in the even wider dissemination of these theories in the West.
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056 87
5-12-58
2.
The idea of a surprise attack upon the Soviet Union and the
countries of the people's democracies is propagated with
especial insistence in the bourgeois press of the Western
states. Let us turn to cases.
The military observer of the magazine United States Army
Combat Forces Journal Lloyd Norman, laid down the principal
theory of nuclear war, naturally not without reservations,
when he wrote in February 1954: "We will be the first to deal
a blow; if necessary, we will begin war in order to fully
enjoy the superiority in the initiative which may be decisive
in atomic war...."
The columnist of the Daily Mirror, Drew Pearson, writing
on the Gaither Committee report said on December 18, 1957:
"In the report it is indicated that the first attack in
modern atomic war will be so powerful that the country making
the attack will probably be victorious. And inasmuch as the
arms race is not in favor of the United States, the conclusion
therefore arises: we cannot afford to wait. To speak plainly,
this is preventive war."
Commenting on the meeting of the Senate Subcommittee on
Military Preparedness, the Star newspaper reporter Edgar Prin
wrote in his January 22, 1958, article: "Today the Secretary
of Defense, McElroy, appeared before a closed session of the
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13: CIA-RDP80B01676R00120004005W-637
5-12-58
3.
Senate Subcommittee on Military Preparedness and answered
questions on 'preventive war,' and on the new top secret
report (a report prepared for the Army by The Johns Hopkins
University) which took the position that the United States
should adopt 'the strategy of the military offensive.' The
Undersecretary of Defense, Quarles, appeared together with
McElroy. #'
The former special advisor to the Navy, the retired
Capt. Puletson, in a statement published in the magazine
United States News and World Report of December 13, 1957,
^lY Y?^ip. ^ !fir ! ^1.?^~I~1~!^^I.w?1
proposed that the Eisenhower Government "review the policy
based on the concept of 'a massive retaliatory blow,' and
build its own strategy on the principle of dealing a pre-
emptive blow." The author writes: "What the United States
must do is adopt a policy which Dulles once proposed and then
discarded, the policy which p1rmits the United States to
select the time, place, and means for dealing a blow."
The same magazine printed the statement of the retired
English Air Marshal Slessor in which he did not exclude the
possibility that United States might deal the first and pre-
emptive blow.
There is no doubt that these and other, similar state-
ments inflame the war psychosis, poison the relationships
between states, and intensify mutual suspicion.
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R00120004005&1 .87
5-12-58
4.
Recently a number of articles have appeared in the bour-
geois press in which the authors seek to show that the proponent
of pre-emptive blows is, they say, the Soviet Union. Thus, in
the January Issue of Forei,n Affairs, Herbert Dinerstein writes
that since 1955 the strategy of pre-emptive war, i.e., dealing
the first blow against the opponent, has been officially
adopted in the Soviet Union. This assertion is in crying
contradiction to reality and is just an attempt to delude
world public opinion.
In the course of the 40-year history of the Soviet state,
the Communist Party and the Soviet Government have con-
sistently conducted a policy of peace and friendship among
peoples. This peace-loving foreign policy arises from the
very essence of our socialist system. There are no classes
or groups interested in war, in the seizure of other people's
territory in the Soviet Union, or in the enslavement of other
peoples. The Soviet people is interested in a firm and lasting
peace which would give the opportunity to build a society where
the general welfare would be secure, all peoples would flourish,
and there would be a lasting peace among the nations.
It is for this very reason that one of the first decrees
of the Soviet Government was the Decree on Peace adopted on
November S, 1917, in which it was proposed to all the warring
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R00120004005ef687
5-12-58
5.
peoples and their governments that they immediately conclude
a just and democratic peace.
After the Great October Socialist Revolution, the Commun-
ist party, on the basis of its policy of peace, at first did
not intend to create a standing army but preferred the militia
system. only the serious situation created as a result of the
armed attack of the imperialists on the young Soviet republic
forced the Soviet people to start to organize regular armed
forces.
After the conclusion of the Civil War, the Soviet Union
was the most active fighter for the maintenance and extension
of peace among the peoples, making concrete proposals for dis-
armament at international conferences and in the League of
Nations. At that time the Soviet people was alone in con-
demning Japanese aggression against China and Italian aggression
against Abyssinia.
From the beginning of Hitlerite aggression in Europe,
the Soviet Union resolutely took the part of small countries
and peoples and was also the initiator of a system of
collective security. However, the policy of "non-intervention"
and "appeasement." pursued at that time by the governments of
the Western nations, disrupted the organization of collective
resistance to the aggressor and gave him the opportunity to
unleash a new world war.
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-IT-87
5-12-55
6.
The Soviet people, which in that war defended the freedom
and independence of its country, played a major role in the
liberation of humanity from the threat of fascist slavery. In
the postwar years, the Soviet Union has continued to conduct a
firm struggle for peace and friendship with all the great and
small countries regardless of their social and state structure.
In the decisions of the XXth Congress of the Communist
Party it is said: "A most imp.)rtant task of the Soviet Union,
the Socialist countries, and other peace-loving countries and
the broad popular masses of all countries is the maintenance
and strengthening of lasting peace and the prevention of a
new war and new aggression."
On the basis of the Leninist principle of the peaceful
co-existence of states with different political systems, the
Communist Party and the Soviet Government has always sought
the relaxation of international tension. The Soviet Union
has consistently fought for peace, fought for the limitation
of armaments and armed forces. Our country is the initiator
of the proposal for the prohibition of the employment of
atomic and nuclear weapons. In recent years the Soviet Union
has reduced its armed forces by 2,140,000 men.
The decisive role which the Soviet Union has played in
extinguishing the flames of war in Korea, Viet-Nam, and
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-ITa87
5-12-58
7.
Egypt, and in the prevention of the aggression against Syria,
is generally known.
The Soviet Union, in the interests of the reduction of
international tension, has voluntarily renounced its military
bases in other countries. Does not this fact alone show the
falsity of the assertion that the U.S.S.R. is preparing "a
preventive war"? Now there are no Soviet bases on foreign
territories. Incidentally, it is always easier to start such
a war from bases situated close to states which one is preparing
to attack. Apparently, therefore, the U.S.A. is also preparing
rocket bases closer to the Soviet Union. Consequently,
accusations of the preparation of "a :preventive war" can be
leveled at the United States of America itself.
The concrete proposals of the government of the U.S.S.R.
on the question of the abolition of the employment of outer
space for military purposes, on the liquidation of foreign
bases on other people's territories, and on international co-
operation in the sphere of the study of outer space are a new
step in the Soviet policy of peace.
In an effort to attain the great goal of sparing mankind
the threat of atomic war, the. Soviet Union has taken the
decision to cease testing alL sorts of atomic and hydrogen
weapons unilaterally. The now peaceful initiative of the
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R0012000400587
5-12-58
8.
U.S.S.R. was praised by the peoples of the world as a bold and
noble step of historical significance, which testifies to the
fact that the Soviet Union is struggling for the maintenance
of peace in deeds and not in words. If the U.S.S.R. nurtured
any aggressive intentions, could it voluntarily renounce the
perfection of nuclear weapons? There cannot be two opinions
on this matter.
The Soviet Union has called upon the U.S.A. and England
to adopt analagous measures so that the testing of nuclear
weapons should be ended once and for all everywhere. However,
these powers have refused to follow the Soviet example. The
question naturally arises of why? Is it not because the ruling
circles of these countries still hope to settle disputed inter-
national questions by force of arms?
The Soviet people cannot but devote attention to the
report that the military command of the U.S.A. has already
more than once sent strategic aircraft loaded with hydrogen
bombs in the direction of the U.S.S.R. It is not necessary
to say what a serious danger these provocational flights of
American planes represent to the cause of peace.
The policy of "a position of strength," the policy of
"the brink of war," and, finally, "preventive war" are all
terms which were born not in the Soviet Union but in the
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040055. 7
5-12-58
9.
U.S.A. It is in the U.S.A. and not in the U.S.S.R. that war
propaganda continues, and that calls to aggression and marches
of conquest are issued.
The Soviet Union possesses all the modern means for the
conduct of war, but it is not seeking war. It does everything
so that peace shall reign on earth, and so that disputed
problems will be decided not on the battlefield but around
the conference table.
One evidence of the peace-loving aspirations of the Soviet
Union is the struggle for the speedy summons of a meeting at'
the highest level. At this meeting the leaders of states can
exchange opinions on ways for the liquidation of "the cold
war" and make the first steps in the solution of international
problems which have become ripe and in the establishment of new
healthy relations among the peoples of all countries.
The Soviet people think that this meeting cannot but
help the accomplishment of such measures as the abolition of
the tests of nuclear weapons by all countries having such
weapons; the creation of a nuclear free zone in Central
Europe; the conclusion of a non-aggression pact among the
participants in the NATO and Warsaw pacts; the expansion of
economic and cultural contacts; and the cessation of war
propaganda. The meeting might also consider such questions
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056'87
5-12'58
10.
as the abolition of the employment of outer space for military
purposes, the liquidation of foreign military bases on other
people's territory, and the conclusion of a German peace treaty,
etc*
The proposal of the Soviet Union to summon a meeting at
the highest level has found warm support in world public
opinion. However, the Western powers have not yet expressed
a desire to speed the calling of the conference. And this
fact shows who is for the peaceful solution of disputed
questions and who is against it.
As history shows, the Soviet Union has more than once
suffered aggressive attacks and has been forced to conduct
hard and bloody wars in order to defend its independence as
a state. The study of the experience of the initial period
of the Great Fatherland War could not but direct the attention
of military thinking to the significance of the factor of
surprise in modern wars. It be4ame patently obvious that the
surprise attack of the German fascist troops permitted them
temporarily to seize the strategic initiative at the be-
ginning of the war.
The appearance of nuclear weapons and the possibility
for their mass employment against troops and targets in the
rear produced different opinions on the significance of
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R0012000400 i-67
5-12-58
11.
surprise attack in a future war and on the measures for
opposing such an attack. This prompted some military authors
to engage in an investigation of the significance of the factor
of surprise in modern war. And the theoretical statements in
the press of individual authors on measures to frustrate an
aggressor's surprise attack were interpreted in the Western
press as a summons to preemptive war.
The Soviet Union was never the first to start a war and
has only taken up arms to defend itself in all cases when it
itself had suffered the attack of the enemy.
The ideas of "preventive war," and the dealing of a pre-
emptive blow as a means of attack and of unleashing war, are
incompatible with the peaceful policy of the Soviet state,
and are incompatible with socialist ideology. These ideas
do not correspond to the interests of the Soviet people who
are building communism.
The Soviet Union is for the establishment of relations
among states on the basis of peaceful co-existence. Moreover,
occupied as they are in peaceful creative toil, the Soviet
people cannot forget that icaptrialistic countries still
exist whose ruling circles have not given up hopes for the
annihilation of the socialist states. This forces the Soviet
Union to strengthen its defensive capability in every way and
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 }Approved For Release 2002/11/13: CIA-RDP80B01676R0012000400568~-SB
12.
constantly to maintain the armed forces in full fighting
readiness to repel the attack of the imperialist aggressors
at any moment. The resolution of this task so vitally impor-
tant for our people always has been and always will be the
special concern of the Communist Party and the Soviet Government.
The interests of defense of the socialist fatherland de-
mand an intense struggle for the execution of the decisions
of the historic XXth Congress of the Communist Party of the
Soviet Union to maintain the defense of the socialist state
on the level of contemporary military technology and science,
constantly to perfect the military training, to improve
political party work in the Army, Air Force, and Navy, and
vigilantly to guard the peaceful toil of the Soviet people
and the great attainments of Socialism.
In their propaganda attacks against socialist countries,
the imperialist circles and their agents direct their main
efforts against the Soviet Union. They always seek to dis-
credit the U.S.S.R. and try to accuse her of aggressive
intentions.
But the Soviet Union has never threatened anyone with
an attack, "preventive war," or dealing a pre-emptive blow.
Always, beginning with the first days of the existence of the
Soviet Union, the leaders of the Communist Party and of our
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R00120004005C-637
5-12-58
13.
state have said that, in the event of an attack upon us, an
immediate retaliatory blow will be dealt to the aggressor.
Naturally, the idea of dealing a retaliatory blow does
not mean conducting only defensive actions. If any aggressor
tried to make an attack upon us, the Soviet armed forces would
conduct the most resolute aggressive action against him.
The great Lenin, foreseeing the possibility of an armed
attack against our country, showed that given constant danger
of war for us from world capitalism it was impossible to say
that we would only defend ourselves. "If we," he said, "in
the face of the constant and actively hostile forces should
give the promise that they propose that we would never have
recourse to certain actions which in the military strategic
sense could be considered offensive, then we would not only
be fools but criminals too."
In the years of the foreign military intervention and
the Civil War of 1918-1920, as in the recent war with German
fascism, the Soviet people gained victory in the last ana-
lysis as the result of the conduct of resolute offensive
action against the aggressive forces which had attacked our
Motherland.
The events of recent timms show that the reactionary
circles of the U.S.A., England, and some other imperialistic
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80B01676R001200040056-6t'-87
5-12-55
14.
countries continue the policy of the arms race, hatch plans
for an attack on the U.S.S.R. and other governments of the
Socialist camp, and do not even stop at propagandizing
"preventive war."
In response to this the Soviet armed forces must constantly
improve their military readiness so that at any moment they
can not only repel an aggressor's surprise attack against our
country, but can immediately deal him a retaliatory blow of
the kind that will once and for all put an end to any and
all attempts to disturb by armed force the ordained move-
ment of the Soviet people to communism.
Approved For Release 2002/11/13 : CIA-RDP80BO1676R001200040056-6
 _Appeoved For Release 2002/11/1 ~TOP t'SENDER WILL CHECK CLASSIFICiJ,}~iCLASSIF
IED CONFIDENTIAL
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
INITIA
~? NAME AND ADDRESS
PREPARE REPLY
App
CONCURRENCE
DISPA CH RECOMMENDATION
FILE RETURN
FORM NO. n37 Replaces Form 30-4
1 APR O. L which may be used.
55
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1955-0-342531