STATE PROPOSED REPORT TO THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON S. 1160, THE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87M01152R001001290003-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 26, 2010
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: July 11, 1985
• Content Type: MEMO

s - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
OLI, 85 E 2051
STAT
STAT
Office of Legislative Liaison
Routing Slip
TO:
ACTION
INFO
1. D/OLL
x
2. DD/OLL
3. Admin Officer
4. Liaison
5. Le islati
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Action Officer:
Remarks:
STAT
~0 p. sit
12 July 1985 ecf
Name/Date
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON. D.C. =W3
July 11, 1985
LEGISLATIVE REFERRAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Legislative Liaison Officer-
Department of Defense - Windus - 697-1305 (6)
Central Intelligence Agency
National Security Council
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
SUBJECT: State proposed report to the Conference Committee
on S. 1160, the Defense Authorization bill.
(NOTE: While the State letter was written to OMB,
the Department intends to turn it into a letter to
the conferees.)
The Office of Management and Budget requests the views of your
agency on the above subject before advising on its relationship to
the program of the President, in accordance with OMB Circular A-19.
A response to this request for.your views is needed no later than
2 P.M. TOMORROW, JULY 12, 1985. Telephone comments are acceptable.
Questions should be referred to Ron Peterson ( 395-7300)
the legislative analyst in-this office.
RONALD K. PETERSON FOR
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Enclosures
cc:. B. Howard
A. Donahue
J. Barie
IAL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152 R001001290003-1
Washington, D.C. 20520
JUL 111985
I am responding to Mr, Peterson's request for the views of
the Department of State on the Department of Defense
Authorization Bill (5.1160) as passed by the House.
The Department has no direct interest in or basis to comment
on the bulk of the bill, which provides funding authorizations
for a wide range of DOD activities and programs. There are,
however, several provisions of the bill to which the the
Department is opposed or about which it has serious concerns.
Section 114: In limiting deployments of the MX ICBM to 40, the
House of Representatives has not followed the Senate's lead in
recognizing and providing for the possibility of additional
deployments in alternative basing modes. Such a limitation on
the MX program would have a severe impact on the strategic
modernization program, and consequently the U.S. ability to
provide for a credible deterrent posture vis-a-vis the Soviet
Union.
Section 119: We oppose the procedure set out in section 119,
subsection (b)(2)(E), on "Conditions on Spending Panda for
Binary Chemical Munitions" which would require the NATO allies
to take a position on U.S. plans for chemical weapons
modernization. We consider the decision to modernize the U.S.
chemical weapons retaliatory stockpile -- which is intended to
restore an effective U.S. deterrent to chemical weapons attack
against U.S. forces, as well as allied forces -- as strictly a
U.S. national decision. We have kept the allies fully informed
of our decisions on this matter. The allies are also aware that
we have no plans to deploy binary chemical weapons in any
foreign country and that should a deployment be considered in
the future, the U.S. will consult beforehand with the countries
concerned.
=Section 213: Section 213 would require certification that the
Soviet Union had conducted a test of an ASAT weapon against an
object in space before the U.S. could conduct such a test. This
section would be unnecessarily restrictive and would impede
progress on the ASAT program; further, such a unilateral
restraint in light of the Soviet union's operational ASAT
capabilities, would likely have an adverse effect on progress in
The Honorable
David A. Stockman,
Director,
Office of management and Budget.
zoo TOO *ON 3Ld 931 H/31b1S ZZ;TZ SS/TT/LO
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
 ,07/11 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152R001001290003-1
- 2-
the Space and Defense Negotiations in Geneva. Consequently, we
believe that the certifications on such testing as contained in
the Senate version of the Defense Authorization Bill would be
more appropriate to the interests of the U.S.
Section 311: We oppose enactment of this section, which
authorizes the Defense Department to provide non-lethal
assistance to persons displaced or who are refugees because of
the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. we welcome the possibility
of increased humanitarian aid being made available for Afghans
from surplus Defense stocks, but have serious reservations about
this particular provision. organizationally, the Department of
State, working closely with AID, has the experience and the
expertise to administer extended humanitarian assistance
programs for refugees. In this regard, however, the bill
explicitly states that the Secretary of Defense shall have the
'sole" responsibility for administration within the U.S. and
that he "may not delegate` this authority outside the DOD. We
are also concerned that no matter how packaged, humanitarian aid
from the DOD would appear, or could be deliberately misconstrued,
to be military or clandestine assistance. Finally, the programs
authorized by the section would make the Government of Pakistan
more vulnerable to Soviet charges that it is providing direct
military assistance to the Afghan resistance -- charges the GOP
has assiduously sought to avoid.
Section 1130: Section 1130 would require the Secretary of
Defense to-submit to the Congress an annual report on nuclear
winter study findings not later than March 1 of 1987, 1988,
'-1989, and 1990. The Administration takes very seriously the
need to regularly assess and report to the Congress and to the
American people on the findings of such studies. The
Administration should retain flexibility, however, as to the
timing and regularity of such reports. In addition, although
the report is required from the Secretary of Defense, the
participation of other agencies will be required to set out
Administration policy in the areas requested by the bill.
Section 1135: We support the objectives of Section 1135
concerning the need for increased Japanese defense efforts, but
question the efficacy of the Section as written. The section
calls on the Department of Defense to issue a report on U.S.
defense expenditures in the Par East containing, inter alia,
projections for national defense expenditures by Japan and the
impact of Japanese defense expenditures on U.S. defense
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
expenditures in Asia. The section singles out Japan among our
East Asian and pacific allies for particular scrutiny in the
a-.ca of defense spending. We question whether the U.S. should
open itself to public portrayal in Japan as seeking to dictate
Japanese defense policy by commenting in official reports on our
projections of Japanese defense spending. One of the criticisms
of Japanese opponents of increased defense spending is that
Japan acts only because of U.S. pressure. A report along the
lines of that required in Section 1135 could feed such criticism
at a time when, as Defense Minister Kato made clear in his visit
to the United States in June, Japan clearly recognizes the
threat and the need for an enhanced defense effort.
Section 1200: This section, 'Limitation onIntroduction onlofation
Armed Forces into Nicaragua for Combat', prevents or expenditure of funds for the purpose of introducing U.S.
forces into or over Nicaragua for combat. Though there are
provisions for exceptions to this limitation, and for the
preservation of existing provisions and treaty authority, the
Department opposes its enactment in its present form. The
President has declared his intention not to send American forces
into Nicaragua or elsewhere in Central America. This commitment
makes section 1200 superfluous. Moreover, there is no provision
in the section which would encourage Nicaragua to moderate its
behavior. The President's power to deploy troops abroad derives
from his constitutional authority as commander-in-Chief of the
Armed Forces, and his broad foreign policy powers. Any
restrictions on the exercise of that authority--even when
limited to a specific regional or country context--raise in our
view serious constitutional questions. For the last two years,
various legislative proposals concerning Central America have
been introduced which purport to limit the President's authority
in this area. Though Section 1200 contains exceptions which are
quite broad, the provision is still an unwise and impermissible
attempt to limit the President's flexibility and authority in
this area. Not only is it more restrictive than the War Powers
Resolution, it does not, nor can it, enumerate every instance
where the President might need to act under his existing
constitutional authority. For example, it is not clear to what
extent this section would permit the President to take part in
regional and multinational peacekeeping or enforcement
activities conducted under the auspices of, for example, the
U.N. security Council.
We believe that the consulting and reporting provisions of
the War Powers Resolution are sufficient to satisfy the Congress'
legitimate needs in this regard. Alternatively, we would be
willing to accept a revision of Section 1200 to a 'sense of the
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1 T.' -0'
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152RO01001290003-1
Congress" formulation, with a strongly worded section in the
conference report which would indicate that the Congress does
not intend to restrict the powers of the Commander-in-Chief to
:ve the Armed Forces in conformity with appropriate laws under
appropriate circumstances in Nicaragua.
Section 1209: This section, "Prohibiting the Department of
Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency from Providing
Assistance to the Nicaraguan Resistance Forces", prevents the
obligation or expenditure of funds authorized by this Act by DOD
or the CIA for the purpose of providing humanitarian assistance
to these forces.
The Senate bill contains no such prohibition. Funding of
humanitarian assistance for the Nicaraguan armed democratic
resistance is provided for in the FY-85 Omnibus Supplemental
sill now under consideration in Congress. Section 1209 is
therefore unnecessary. Although there are no funds in the DOD
Authorization Bill for this purpose, we oppose such a restriction
on the President's authority to administer this program.
The Administration strongly prefers the Senate supplemental
appropriation language which would permit the President to
decide which agency in our government is best suited to carry
out such assistance and assigns the NSC a monitoring role in the
administration of the program.
I request that these views be reflected, as appropriate, in
the Administration positions at the forthcoming conference.
With best wishes,
Sincerely,
wri am' "mall, III
Assistant Secretary
Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
000 T00'ON 33d 931 H/31d1S #F:TT Ge/TT/LO
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/02/26: CIA-RDP87MO1152 R001001290003-1 ~