HANDWRITTEN LETTER

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 28, 2009
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: July 16, 1985
• Content Type: LETTER

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT
ROUTING SLIP
SUSPENSE
ACTION
INFO
DATE
INITIAL
1
DCI
2
DDCI
3
EXDIR
4
D/ICS
5
DDI
6
DDA
7
DDO
8
DDS&T
9
Chm/NIC
10
GC
11
IG
12
Compt
13
D/OLL
14
D/PAO
X
15
VC/NIC
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
STAT
ecu ive Secretary
2 July 1985
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
 STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
 Al HOLD BEICIMAN
recently read a review, pub-
lished in a certain magazine to
be identified later, of a book,
Dezinformatsia, by two
respected academics, Professor
Richard H. Shultz Jr. of Tlifts Uni-
versity's Fletcher School of Diplo-
macy and Roy Go dson of
Georgetown University. 'The review
made the following serious charges
against this book:
o The book was said to use "spe-
cious arguments to prove the obvi-
ous.,
o It misrepresents reality to prove
Arnold Beichman, a founding
member of the Consortium for the
Study of Intelligence, of which Pro-
fessor Godson is coordinator, fre-
quently writes about intelligence
matters.
? It is "misguided,", exhibits a
"total lack of understanding" about
Clausewitz, shows "a superficial
understanding of current history
and the Soviet Union.",
e It didn't "fairly report" the con-
tent of Soviet journals, it has treated
the subject "irresponsibly;" it suffers
from "extraordinarily naive
assumptions" and "erroneous his-
tory."
*And the book was said "ulti-
mately" to serve "neither
scholarship nor the national inter-
est."
Such harsh language about the
published work of academics can be
defined as a form of character assas-
sination, since it questions their
honor as teachers and researchers.
For my part, to be even harsher, I
would say that this review could,
with little editing, have appeared in
a Soviet publication:
Now, then, would you like to guess
in what left-wing, pro-Soviet, pro-
gressive journal this book review
appeared? If you're very smart and
sophisticated, you might try and
guess, but you'd be wrong. I'll have
to tell you:
This book review appeared in an
official magazine of the government
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
widesprea
appeal because it is simple and
reflects the egalitarian principle of
American society," writes Jean Yar-
brough, a political science professor
at Loyola University in Chicago, in
the summer issue of Policy Review.
"But when applied to military
affairs, it is wrong and dangerous "
Her arguments are simple, if not
obvious. Physical and psychological
differences that are important in
combat, such as strength and
aggression, give men the advantage.
Nurturing and conciliation are gifts
that have no currency on the bat-
tlefield. What seems absurd is that
such arguments still have to be
made.
One of the most touching scenes
in the movie "An Officer and a Gen
tleman," is the moment during basic
training when Richard Gere sacri-
fices a record-making run to help a
young woman overcome an obstacle
she is too weak to climb. In real life
running, women keep up only with
men who slow down.
world organizes its
army by treating
women as if they are
the same as men. To
do so would leave the
motherland
vulnerable.
Physical requirements have actu-
ally been lowered for women at West
Point. They do not take part in hand-
to-hand combat with men, only with
women, even though it's unlikely
they'll ever encounter other women
in a war. When only 14 percent of the
women at West Point achieved a
passing time on the two-mile run
compared with 96 percent of the
men, West Point changed the rules to
let women "pace themselves"
against the times of women.
women to answer nature's call as
easily (well, almost) as men without
excusing themselves from battle,
and without taking off their fighting
clothes.
The Army's approach to equal
opportunity, while pleasing some
aging radical feminists, is out-of-
step with recent feminist thinking.
Jean Baker Miller, a psychiatrist,
calls in Ms. magazine for women to
become leaders in international
relations so that men don't use
"brute force"
This goes to the heart of the prob-
lem. A "brute force" is exactly what
every successful army must be.
Women generally don't make good
brutes. Wars are won, in George S.
Patton's celebrated formulation, not
by "poor sons of bitches dying for
their country," but by "men who
make other poor sons of bitches die
for their country." The battlefield -
which every army must regard as its
ultimate destination - is no place to
conduct daring social experiments.
bled exemption.
California taxpayers a netof $3.2 bil-I
lion. And what they lose in the state
and local deduction ($4 billion) is
more than offset by what they gam
in rate reduction ($6 billion) ahd the
doubled exemptions ($4.8 billion)
which also help offset other lost
deductions.
The prestigious accounting firm
of Arthur Andersen did a study - for
the Joint Economic Committee of
Congress, and found that even high,
income, itemizing taxpayers in every
state with taxable incomes of
$50,000 and varying values of homes
came out ahead with the president's
plan. Even in New York City, Mr
Cuomo's home, taxpayers with a
median home ($97,000 value) werd
$600 better off than under cunrnt
law. And in the great "heartland",
states of Ohio and Illinois, the saw
ings were $1,200 to $1,700. _
This is why Mr. Cuomo is blowing
smoke on this issue. Just dont let
that smoke blind you to the value of
tax reform.
That's why the Greater Washing-
ton (D.C.) Research Center's July 1
report said lower-income taxpayers
would receive the largest propor-
tional benefits under Mr. Reagan's
proposal.
The reason? Of the 58 percent of
all federal tax return filers with
incomes below $20,000, only 11.6
percent (less than 6.7 percent of all
taxpayers) claimed deductions for
state and local taxes, and they only
got $7.6 billion, or 7.8 percent of the
total.
This means the huge lower-
income 58 percent of all taxpayers
paid at least $65 billion in state and
local taxes that they could not or did
not deduct from their federal tax.
Only lower tax rates could offset that
harsh injustice.
Of the 21 percent of all the taxpay-
ers in the $20,000-30,000 group, only
44.4 percent itemized, and this
group got only 18 percent of the
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
 BEICf1NM
From page 1 D
of the United States, a magazine pub-
lished by the Central Intelligence
Agency - yes, by the CIA under the
,supervision of the Deputy Director-,
ate for Intelligence that is responsi-
ble for all CIA analyses of world
affairs.
The publication, a quarterly
called Studies it., Intelligence, is an
"in-house" publication. It is not dis-
tributed publicly since some articles
are classified; others, such as the
book review I am discussing, are
unclassified. The essay-review, in
the magazine's winter 1984 issue,
was written by Avis Boutell, a CIA
analyst, who works for the Foreign
Broadcast Information Service.
When I read the Shultz-Godson
book some months ago to prepare
my own favorable review, I found it
a cool, scholarly examination of
Soviet propaganda and disinfor-
mation strategies. So did a number
of other distinguished Sovietologists
and publicists, such as Professors
Adam Ulam and Uri Ra'anan, Dr.
Robert Conquest, and Professor Sid-
ney Hook, who wrote the laudatory
introduction.
The book, now in its third edition,
included what I regarded as highly
informative interviews with defec-
tors who had specialized, while in
the service of the KGB in the
U.S.S.R. and Czechoslovakia, in
"active measures." The Soviet
strategy of "active measures"
involves, for the most part, covert
disinformation as "a non-attributed
or falsely attributed communica-
tion, written or oral, containing
intentionally false, incomplete, or
misleading information [frequently
combined with true information],
which seeks to deceive, misinform,
and/or mislead the target," accord-
ing to the Shultz-Godson definition.
In other words, the book
describes a panoply of Soviet tactics
to manipulate the media in the
democracies, the use of "agents of
influence;' sponsorship of clandes-
tine radio broadcasts, and use of
international front organizations.
These strategies and tactics are
excellently described in this impor-
tant book.
Not only is Studies in Intelligence
an official government magazine,
but it also is published by a U.S.
secret service. It therefore must be
assumed that whatever is published
therein represents the official view
of the CIA or, at the very least, the
point of view of CIA analysts. As an
analogy, a Voice of America edito-
rial, for example, must be approved
by responsible State Department
officials before it can be read on the
air.'
If the CIA book review reflects
the political culture of the CIA and
the world in which its analysts live,
then some of the egregious errors
about Soviet intentions made by the
CIA over the past 15 or more years,
errors which have been publicly dis-
cussed in the press and by the two
congressional committees on intelli-
gence oversight, become under-
standable.
One could take apart, paragraph
by paragraph, this CIA book review
to demonstrate its use of the rhetoric
of overkill.
Here I want merely to deal with
the political approach of a CIA ana-
lyst whose views, no matter what the
CIA might say, seem to harmonize
with the agency's ethos, which I pray
is not that of William J. Casey, CIA
director. That this review got past
Mr. Casey, I can understand; he has
more important problems to deal
with. But isn't there somebody in his
organization who has the wit, under-
standing, and common decency to
realize that the language used to dis-
cuss the Shultz-Godson book might
be better suited to a review of Hit-
ler's Mein Kampf?
'hke this sneering, reductive sen-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release
L uU,c -
authors] he review: "They [the
understani#em less concerned to
prove that the Soviet Union than to
West totally [t is irrational and the,,
Now anyor?enign."
book know" who has read this
seek to prove that the authors do not
tional. On the Oat the U.S.S.R. is irra-
demonstrate is ttontrary, what they
is performing wit the Soviet KGB
assignment to furtk' great skill its
no's foreign-policy offer the Politbu-
giveaway phrase in that'-etives. The
"to prove; .. the West totally t)!$ ence is
Of course, the authors nov.xQc 1
try to show that the West is t(:i ally
benign. Such a thesis is irrelevam to
the book since it is mer--.3y,
attempting to discuss Soviet "active'
measures," not the good intentions of
the West.
But let's face it: couldn't a victim
of Soviet totalitarianism, rotting in,
one of its prison camps - or an'
Andrei Sakharov or Anatoly,
Shcharansky - say that, in compari-
son to the wholly rational tyranny of
the U.S.S.R, the West is "totally
benign?"
What the author (and in this, I am;
sure, the reviewer reflects the views,
of the CIA establishment) clearly;
rejects (and the targets of the,
review do not) is 'the meaning of
Marxism-Leninism as a permanent,
constituent of Soviet foreign policy.
What that doctine means is that,
Mikhail Gorbachev cannot regard as
legitimate any system of rule other,.
than communism. Marxism-,
Leninism sees other political sys
tems as doomed to fall because of the
"contradictions of capitalism."
Since Marxism-Leninism carries;
the banner of history and the future,
the U.S.S.R. alone has the right to
judge who shall live and who shall
die. That is why negotiation with the
Soviet Union, except on its own'
terms, is doomed to fail until they
Soviet Union accepts - in practice,
not in joint communiques - an
amendment to the eschatology of'
Marxism-Leninism.
The CIA reviewer demonstrates'
- let's call it naivete - a surprising
naivete in assuming that the Soviet
media, during the Nixon-Kissinger-
Ford detente period, out of convic-
tion sincerely ascribed to the West.
"realistic, positive qualities:'
And she attacks the authors for
not giving due credit to this thawing;
of the eternal Soviet winter. Of
course, the Soviet media were will-
ing to be kinder and less strident;
because it was during detente that'
the U.S.S.R. engaged without West-
ern opposition in the greatest arms-
building program of any country in
program to this very day.
But then there came came a time
when the kissing had to stop. The
Soviet media changed the.lovey-
dovey, bear-hugging music. What in.~
heaven's name did the West do that
forced upon a doting Soviet Union a
change of tune, from detente mel-
lowness to cold war harshness? Was
the error to accept sadly the
destruction of 269 lives on KAL 007?
Sadly accept the killing of Major
Nicholson? Sadly accept the attempt
on the pope's life? Sadly accept mar-
tial law for Poland? Sadly accept the
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan?
But let us assume that the
reviewer is correct in some of her
criticisms. Does that call for a sav-
ers on high-level billingsgate? Does '
it call for a cannonade of unprovable
charges such as the claims that the
book "hurts" the profession of intel-
ligence, and the efforts to develop "a.;
rational foreign policy," and that the
book serves "neither scholarship
nor the national interest?" If any-
body has "hurt" the profession of
intelligence, it would be Avis Boutell
and whoever edits the CIA mag-
azine.
What kind of behavior is that, Wil-
liam Casey? Is someone down there
trying to get even with somebody ;
else?
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3
TUESDAY, JULY] 1985
CLAS
GE 5D
STARTS QN PF
STEPHE
CHAPMAN
Burger thro
-Justice loses his cool over
Judges are notoriously fallible,
but it isn't too much to ask that
their mistakes be confined to
the courtroom. Unfortunately,
Warren Burger, who has done
-enough damage in his daytime job as
chief justice of the United States of
- America, insists on, occasionally
moonlighting as the village crank.
His latest tirade was contained in
a talk to about 30 delegates to the
--national convention of the American
Bar Association, in which Mr.
:Burger portrayed advertising by
lawyers as a certain sign of the col-
,lapse of civilization as we know it.
"I will say never - my advice to
'the public is - never, never, never,
-under any circumstances, engage
the services of a lawyer who adver-
tises,' he spluttered, as if he were
talking about convicted shoplifters.
The chief justice went on to
denounce much legal advertising as
"sheer shysterism" which is "pulling
down" the image of the entire legal
rofession.
Pulling down its image? Well, as
,Dorothy Parker said when informed
that Calvin Coolidge had died, how
Can`pnyone tell? Outside the cham-
bers 'of the Supreme Court, it may
-surprise Mr. Burger to learn, people
don't genuflect whenever a blue suit
walks into the room.
It's also an open question whether
the profession's image suffers more
from lawyers' TV commercials or
from the continual example of War-
ren Burger. And scholars can attest
that the term "shyster" was habit-
ually applied to attorneys long
before television was invented.
Stephen Chapman is a nationally
syndicated columnist.
. =GWYNNE DYER
do not wish to be branded
as a pessimist;' said Derek
Winstanley, a British meteo-
rologist now working for the
V.S. National Oceanic and Atmos-
pheric Service in Washington, "but
,events over the past two decades
testify to the harsh realities that
have to be faced" Most of the Sahel
may be doomed, he believes: people
simply cannot live there any more.
It is not just a question of drought -
the climate is changing.
It is bad enough that people are
starving in the millions this year all
along the southern edge of the
Sahara, and it is hard enough to get
food to them even on an emergency
basis. But nobody wants to contem-
-plate the prospect that the region
never will recover.
If the rains do not eventually
return to this vast, semi-desert area,
some 20 million to 30 million people
will have to move or die. Moving
them, however, would be the
equivalent of evacuating all of
Canada and resettling its population
somewhere else (with the added
complication that some entire coun-
-- tries, such as Chad and Mali, might
bandon 1--n-
_.b-m- to be virtually abandoned --n-
But
But Mr. Burger is not a thinker of
dazzling clarity. How else do we'
explain his assumption that an
address to 30 lawyers, at a meeting
open to any of 15,000 delegates, at
the convention of a group renowned
for its love of publicity, was strictly
private? "I am not ready to say that
I his opinion of lawyers' ads I publicly
yet," he demurred, as a working
reporter from The Washington Post
dutifully recorded every'word.
The chief justices
comments should be
taken not as a
detached analysis of
the public interest,
but as special-interest
pleading. But it isn't
likely to change
anything... When
Warren Burger rants,
we have the luxury of
ignoring him.
He also managed to insult a per-
fectly honorable trade when he
insisted that if he were in private
practice, he would "go out and dig
ditches before" he'd advertise. This
is the sort of vow that can come only
from someone who has never dug
ditches. A couple of hours at the
business end of a shovel would give
Mr. Burger a new respect for
ambulance-chasing.
Is
There are omin
DESERT REG10
SOUTH 7% MR
SEVEN NATIONS IN DANGER d
If the rains do not eventually retun
to this vast, semi-desert area, son
20 million to 30 million people will
have to move or die. Moving them
however, would be the equivalent
evacuating all of Canada and
resettling its population somewher
else - with the added complicatib
that some entire countries, such a
Chad and Mali, might have to be
virtually abandoned.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2009/12/29: CIA-RDP87M00539R002904800012-3