RESPONSE TO LETTER FROM DR. FRANK T. MANHEIM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 11, 2007
• Sequence Number: 37
• Publication Date: September 17, 1982
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
Dr. Frank T. Manheim
US Department of the Interior
Geological Survey
Office of Marine Geology
Woods Hole, Ma. 02543
Dear Dr. Manheim:
17. S1909
Your letter to Admiral Inman on the subject of the under-
utilization of the results of exchange visits by U.S. scientists
has been called to my attention. You have described a valid
problem which comes up for consideration periodically. However,
to date, little has been done about it.
Each agency handles the matter of scientific trip reports in
its own way. Some provide wide distribution; others give them
little circulation at all. You may wish to raise your idea for
an archival and research center with the President of the
National Academy of Sciences or the Director of the National
Science Foundation, since their organizations are most directly
involved. At the very least, it should be possible to maintain
indices of such trip reports in the libraries of the individual
agencies.
Thank you for your letter and suggestion.
5incerel
Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
 Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
O.G %, r, 1
SUBJECT: Response to Letter from Dr. Frank T. Manheim
Distribution:
Orig - Addressee
1 - DDCI
1 - ED
1 - ER
1. - DDI
1 - DDI Reg
1 - OSWR Chrono
1 - TTAC Chrono
1 - C/TTAC
OSWR/TTAC
(16 Sept 82)
STAT
Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
 United States Department of the Interior ?? A~ ~~,
office of Marine Geology
Woods Hole, Ma, 02543
July 9, 1982
Admiral Bobby Inman, Assistant Director
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington D.C. 20505
The letterhead identifies my job with the U.S. Geological Survey,
but this correspondence reflects my personal views only.
This letter involves the U.S.'s ability to acquire better and more
comprehensive information about scientific and technological activity
in the Soviet Union and Communist Bloc countries. I would like to point
out the underutilization of exchange visits by U.S. scientists for this
purpose, and offer some suggestionsfor improvement.
I am addressing myself to you in part because of my parallel interests
to your testimony before the Hearings on NationallSecurity and Economic Growth
through Foreign Language Improvement(HR 3231), 1981. A colleague and I
recently reported results of a study of world earth science literature
and translation. We found-that Russian language citations contributed
roughly 40% of total indexed items. However, only about 20% of titles
cited in the Russian indexing service(Referativnyi Zhurnal) are even
listed in the principal English language indexing services(GeoRef and
GeoArchive(U.K.)). Less than 2% of English speaking geologists have an
ability to handle the Russian language. This is far less than a critical
mass needed to even determine what is available. Utilization and availability
of translations have further declined in recent years. Though one can
criticize aspects of the Soviet science effort in earth sciences, the current
situation makes it all too easy to underestimate the resources and capabilities
of the Soviet Union.
To get to my main topic, however, I'd like to draw on my numerous
exchange and other visits to th e Soviet Union and every other Eastern
European country except Albania. I was also a member of the National
Academy's Advisory Committee on Exchange with the Soviet Union and Eastern
Europe in 1977-1979. At that time, it was impossible to draw effectively
upon the files of previous exchange visits to compile information on
institutions and individuals working in given scientific fields. The reasons
for th is were twofold. The Committee pleaded poverty in not being able
to set up an appropriate cross-indexed filing system for reports on travel.
Further, many scientists filed only perfunctory, " I had trouble with
hotel accomodations in Novosibirsk" types of reports and did not provide
hard, nuts and bolts accounts, or ancillary observations of importance.
Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
 Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
Of course I don't need to emphasize to you how effective a truly knowledgeable
expert can be in taking advantage of an interacademy visit, where the red carpet
is out, and the Soviets make a m ajor effort to comply with the wishes of the visitor.
In such a visit Soviet scientists and technicians know they have a green light to
communicate, and are often extremly eager to do so. Such visits are one of the few
avenues they have for two-way communication with the West. Moreover, not infrequently
foreign scientists can be extremely h elpful for the personal and career advancement.
of Soviet colleagues, by arranging for Western publication, translation, invitations,
sending reprints, recommending personnel for offices in international organizations,
and the like.
However, we in the U.S. have failed to take advantage of the opportunities
exchange visits offer by the unplanned, serendipitous, laissez faire, approach
we take to the whole system. As I mentioned, there has been no serious effort made
n the Academy to compile lists, names, subjects, etc. Nor has there been m uch
communication of the results of visits, in spite of the new newsletter. There has
been a move to make a formal report part of the obligation of scientists' accepting
support, but the nature of the report is still very much up to the scientist/. It's
in the tradition of American Academy operation to be very informal and allow maximum
freedom of action for individual scientists. I realize that many returning scientists
are visited by CIA personnel, -but based on m y own experience, I am not convinced
that this approach is very effective. In another sense, a certain amount of disinforma-
tion enters the system of communications in the U.S. Scientists have no reluctance
to talk about favorable aspects of the Soviet Union, or pass along material provided
to them by hosts where this is not harmful to their Soviet colleagues. However,
many people are reluctant to communicate (or even explore) other aspects either
for fear of harming Soviet scientists with whom th ey have cordial relationships, or
jeopardizing th eir own opportunities to return. An exception has been efforts,
particularly by Jewish scientists to make contact with dissidents and others who
need help.
I am not suggesting an attempt to recruit more scientists to scout out information
for the CIA, because given the heterogeneous nature of our scientists this would
inevitably come to public and/or the Soviet's attention. This would be counterproductive
and might harm the current and jrobably well-earned image of American scientists
not being involved in political missions.
As an alternative, I suggest forming an open archival and research unit,
perhaps as a part of the State Department, wh ich would work in close cooperation
with the Academy. By providing modest research support, for example for travel,
organization of files, etc. it could acquire close cooperative relationships with
the Academy's exchange system. It could encourage appropriate publication by
scholars, and in suitable ways point out gaps in information. By providing
better documentation and accessibility to previous reports, one could also upgrade
the quality and extensiveness of future reports. Being better prepared, scientists
could make much more effective use of their time abroad. Others, wishing to
make future trips, could direct correspondence or preparation more effectively.
From the CIA side, the existence of the archival unit would offer access to
staffers, perhaps by indirection, on in such a way as to minimize any indication
that the unit was a part of CIA functions. At the same time, th ose scientists
who would be willing to more directly aid in filling informational gaps would be
greatly aided by the existence of a reputable information center, wholly devoted
to providing the American scientific and technical community with assistance in
acquiring information about Eastern bloc science. The justification for such a
center can be readily ,und in the abysmal linguistic knowledge of American scientists
Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
 Approved For Release 2007/09/11: CIA-RDP83M00914R001200060037-7
and our obvious defiencies in understanding foreign cultures and their s
-technical and other ach ievements.
Travel to the Soviet Union is much harsher and more unpleasant, not
much more expensive than it used to be. Many. Americans are no longer in
in travel. I believe that special efforts need to be made to increase th
of existing American travel to the Soviet Union, in terms of information
y field to th e United States. At the same time, more encouragement by ou
and more opportunities to make efficient use of that travel would be in
national interest.
11_~
Dr. Frank T. Manheim
Approved For Release 2007/09/11 CIA-RDP83MOO914ROO1200060037-7
cientific,
to mention
terested
e effectiveness
al and other
r Government
the