TALKING POINTS TO BE USED WITH THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE REGARDING NIE 11-3/8-80 (U)

Document Type: 
Collection: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
CIA-RDP81B00401R002300120003-4
Release Decision: 
RIPPUB
Original Classification: 
S
Document Page Count: 
12
Document Creation Date: 
December 12, 2016
Document Release Date: 
July 8, 2002
Sequence Number: 
3
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
June 6, 1980
Content Type: 
MF
File: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon CIA-RDP81B00401R002300120003-4.pdf432.09 KB
Body: 
Approved FP ~- Release 2002543 -RDP81 13004111 R0RFA@0;4b9g36 THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE WASHINGTON, D. C. 20505 FROM: National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs VIA: Deputy Director. for National Foreign Assessment MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence Deputy Director of Central Intelligence SUBJECT: Talking Points-to be Used with the Secretary of Defense Regarding NIE 11-3/8-80 (U) REFERENCES: (a) Memcon of DCI/SecDef on NIE 11-3/8-79, dated 11 March 1980 (b) SecDef Memorandum X07843, dated 15 April 1980 (c) Memorandum for Record, SP-95/80, dated 6 June 1980 (Comments of Key Consumers of NIE 11-3/8, Soviet Strategic Nuclear Capabilities) 1. Action Requested: That you use the attached talking points at an upcoming meeting with the Secretary of Defense to discuss our plans for producing NIE 11-3/8-80. (C) 2. Background: a. The production of NIE 11-3/8-79 was delayed somewhat by incorporating the SAGA study findings in the Estimate, then removing both the SAGA study and US No-SALT forces at Secretary Brown's request (Reference a). b. We believe it is incumbent upon us this year to complete the NIE by early November. --In the last two years, the complexity of producing NIE 11-3/8 has resulted in its being issued several months after the November completion date desired by consumers. Moreover, preparation of the NIE has been burdensome on every one involved in its preparation. We wish, therefore, to complete this year's NIE on schedule. OSD has no objection to declassification and release. 111801 CX Jun2QOQ_ B9al.6 Pr I __ OSD review(s) comI 1 fr ved For Release 200 L11 A-RDP81 B00401 R0023901~20063-4 Approved For elease 20021 1' +PTRDP81 B0040~002300120003-4 SP - 96/80 SUBJECT: Talking Points to be Used with the Secretary of Defense Regarding NIE 11-3/8-80 --Some of our consumers, particularly in the DoD, report that the delays of recent years. have complicated matters for US force planners. --In a. Presidential election year it is desirable to have our annual analysis of the strategic situation in print in November, the normal scheduled date for issuing the NIE. c. It would,-therefore, be highly desirable for you to discuss with Secretary Brown requirements for US force.data and projections for this year's NIE. --We would prefer to follow this year's example of not including results from the JCS/SAGA analysis in the NIE which Secretary Brown clearly favors. --We propose-including the several types of indexes comparing Soviet and US forces, including residuals, in this year's NIE as a basis for general conclusions about trends. We would include residuals among the indexes, despite the objections of DoD intelligence agencies. Aside from the issue of turf about net assessments, this approach is consistent with Secretary Brown's position in his 15 April 1980 memorandum (Reference b, attached) that no single set of exchange calculations can depict the US-USSR strategic balance. (Key, consumers are divided on the issue of net assessments in NIE 11-3/8. See Reference c attached.) --In contrast to NIE 11-3/8-79, we need to compare Soviet No-SALT projected forces with a US No-SALT force(s). A future strategic environment is at least as likely without SALT II as with it. Moreover, the President's recent request for additional SALT/No-SALT comparisons reinforces. the need for the DoD to provide-us both US SALT-limited and No-SALT forces. --We have not yet decided on the rationale and assumptions for alternative projections of Soviet forces with and without SALT II. Secretary Brown may have some views about the alternative Soviet force options he would like the NIE to contain. Approved For Release 2002>': I-RDP81 B00401 R002300120003-4 Approved Fo-Release 200SEM ELBA-RDP8180040 002300120003-4 SP - 96/80 SUBJECT: Talking Points to be Used with the Secretary of Defense Regarding NIE 11-3/8-80 d. We are preparing to launch the production of NIE 11-3/8-80 on a schedule which will achieve an early November completion date. -Secretary Brown's.agreement to provide us US force data and any views he may have about alternative Soviet force projections will assist us greatly in our efforts to carry out this task. (S) 3. Recommendation:. That you use the attached talking points to discuss our plans and requirements with Secretary Brown. (U) David S. Brandwein Attachments cc: Chairman, National Intelligence Council 25X1A U Approved For Release 2002/08A 1.C IDP81 B00401 R002300120003-4 T E Approved or Release 20 2 'I21 CIA-RDP81 BO0(4018002300120003-4 -4- SP - 96/80 SUBJECT: Talking Points to.be Used with the Secretary of Defense Regarding NIE 11-3/8-80 Distribution: Cy.1 - DCI 2 - DDCI '.3-ER 4 DD/NFA 5 - DD/NFAC 6 - Chrt/NIC 7 - NIO/SP 8 - NFAC/AS 9 - NFAC Registry 261A DSBrandwein:rnat6Jun80) SECRET ---- Approved- For-Re lease 2002./08/21 : -CIA-RDP81 B-00401 R002300120003-4 MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD I? March 1980 SUSJECT:.;"Conversation with the Secretary of De;ense, 11 March 1980 1. We disposed of the NIE 11-3/8 problem very Secretary we were taking the US No SALT projections and. all.SAGAtmaterial. He said to me then, "It will be just like last year." I said yes, it will be just like last year, upd4tgd. He seid that was fine with him. The Secretary incidentally said that he had no objection to our doing net assessments. He just didn't'want them in NIE's because of the stature they had. In talking with General argumentation against continuing even m~tour h also, I detected the line of be that the NIE has such-stature andthese gare~soysubjectntoymisinter- pretation that we shouldn't risk that. (S/iIOFOR^N) STANSFI.E D TUR? ,_R Director ORIGINAL cL BY /G '9 l7 Approved For ReleaslA-R>f~~~4002~3b1~~~ - ... 13YNDO6 Yy IMP RF ;SON t:~ s?tp~ 25X1A 1 5 APR 1380 SUBJECT: Assessments of the Strategic Balance 'Attached are two. analyses of trends in indices, static and dynamic, of the. strategic balance. Both report calculations of force exchange outcomes ..under a range of assumptions. One was prepared by SAGA under the super- vision of.a Net Assessment Advisory Committee, and addresses itself to the :future .strategic balance under SALT 11. The other was prepared by PA&E to provide a more thorough discussion of the strategic balance calculations which appeared in the Department of Defense Annual Report. I am circulating these analyses because of the interest of other agencies in assessments of the current and likely future state of the strategic balance. But these analyses,_while they provide useful inputs to an assess- ment of that balance, do not in themselves provide a sufficient basis for such an assessment. Like all suth analyses, they depend for their results entirely on assumptions about the composition and performance of U.S. and Soviet forces, unique scenarios and the tactics each would employ. Assessing the strategic balance requires analysis and judgments that go far beyond the relatively narrow set of factors and contingencies that current exchange calculations are able to include. An outstanding example is that these analyses do not evaluate the effects of attacks on command, control, and intelligence upon the performance of the forces. Another is that these analyses focus exclusively on the outcomes of major exchanges in which each side adopts a highly stylized single set of attack objectives. They do not compare U.S. and Soviet strategic forces in the other situations where we expect them to p-lay a role: crisis, theater war, escalation, LNOs, nuclear conflict which takes place over an extended period of time, and continued military operations after the major exchange. Even if these formal calculations were more comprehensive, the adequacy-of our strategic posture could be assessed only by including judgments about .how Soviet assessments are likely to differ from ours. Deterrence is our first objective.. That makes the Soviet assessment, not ours, the critical issue. -4 TS r2 p~4W-oh R I e 2002/08/21 : CIA-RDP 401 R002300120 CIO fir.rJt- X15. nr Approved For Release 2002/08/21 : CIA-RDP81 B00401 R002300120003-4 NFAC #4095-80 THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE SP - 95/80 6 June 1980 Copy MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT: Comments of Key Consumers of NIE 11-3/8, Soviet Strategic Nuclear Capabilities (U) 1. The attachment is a detailed account of a meeting of key consumers on 29 May 1980 called by Mr. Bruce Clarke to obtain comments on NIE 11-3/8-79, "Soviet Capabilities for Strategic Nuclear Conflict in the 1980s." (U) 2. Comments of the participants which are most important to planning for production of national intelligence on Soviet strategic nuclear programs: a. An annual NIE is required in the last quarter of the calendar b. The NIE should contain a comprehensive treatment of all strategic offensive and defensive forces (a compendium). c. The NIE need not be completely rewritten each year; it should be updated as required. d.. The format, printing and graphics of the NIE are excellent. e. The participants were divided on the issue of whether net assessments, that is, the results of exchange calculations depicting the relationship of Soviet and US offensive forces, should be in the NIE. Department of Defense participants were adamently opposed. NSC Staff and Department of. State participants believed the NIE should contain such assessments, and the ACDA representative implied that they should. All participants agreed that assessments of the US-USSR strategic nuclear balance by the US government require improvement. f. The material in Chapters I, II, III and IV covering Soviet policies and doctrine, offensive and defensive forces and operational capabilities are most important to consumers and should receive priority attention. Approved For Release 2002/08/21 OMA;r IR 1 B00401 R002300120003-4 Approved Forl 80040 02300120003-4 'lease 2002/08/21 : J SP - 95/80 SUBJECT: Comments of Key Consumers of NIE 11-3/8, Soviet Strategic Nuclear Capabilities g. Department of Defense consumers wanted Volume I of the NIE to be a faithful summary of the longer Estimate. (Other consumers were silent on this issue and none addressed whether the volumes should cover only NIE findings of most significance to high level consumers as-recommended previously by the NIE consultants, or whether it should summarize the entire Estimate.) h. Among the suggested topics for improved treatment in the NIE, the participants placed most importance on Soviet command, control and communications--capabilities, vulnerabilities, implications. Other topics mentioned were: --Launch-under-attack. --Implications of strategic exercises. --Effectiveness of possible ballistic missile defense. --Implications of advanced technology. i. In content and presentation of material, the participants recommended that the NIE --Contain more citations to the evidential and analytical bases for key findings, particularly on soft, subjective conclusions. --Contain footnote references to key source studies and estimates. --Highlight for the reader substantive changes from the previous issuance of the NIE. (S) 3. The consumer group did not address the following key issues pertinent to this year's NIE 11-3/8. a. Whether our forecasts of Soviet forces should be based primarily on the assumption that SALT II would not be ratified. b. The assumptions which should underly our alternative projections of offensive Soviet forces. Approved For Release 2002/08/2 - l 1 B00401 R0023001 20003-4- 1 LA Approved F Release 2002/08/ ~, RgP81 B00 R002300120003-4 SP - 95/80 SUBJECT: Comments of Key Consumers of NIE 11-3/8, Soviet Strategic Nuclear Capabilities c. Consumer interest in the integration of developments in Soviet strategic programs into a broader assessment of overall Soviet military capability and its implications for Soviet foreign policies. (S) 25X1A David S. Brandwein National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs Attachment Approved For Release 2002/08(FECj, L 1 P81 B00401 R002300120003-4 Approved Fc Release 2002/08/21 ~Qp 1 8004 ' 002300120003-4 ~i~'Y_ 25X1A 25X1A 25X1A SP - 95/80 SUBJECT: Comments of Key Consumers of NIE 11-3/8, Soviet Strategic Nuclear Capabilities 14 - OSR/SF Distribution: Cy 1 - DD/NFA 2 - DD/NFAC 3 - Chm/NIC 4 - AChm/NIC 5-8 - NFAC/SRP 9 - NI0/GPF 10 - NI0/USSR-EE 11 - D/OSR 12 - D/OSWR 13 - OSR/SEC 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NIO/SP (6Jun80) 15 - - Leicester W. Cook, State/INR - Michael P. Elcano, Army/ACSI - Eugene E. Rodenburg, Navy/OP-009F - LTC. Verne V. Wattawa, Air Force - NIO/SP - NFAC/AS - NFAC Registry Approved For Release 2002/08/21 : CIl1rr401 R002300120003-4 Approved For Release 2002/0bf9ftl$- 1 B00401 R002300120003-4 is 25X1A 25X6 Briefing 'on Intelligence clatters e ST trip e Intelligence relations 25X6 25X6 is weapons Approved For Release 2002/08 tRPAt@1 B00401 R002300120003-4 25X6 Approved For Release 2002/08/21 : CIA-RDP81 800401 R002300120003-4 Next 5 Page(s) In Document Exempt Approved For Release 2002/08/21 : CIA-RDP81 800401 R002300120003-4