COLBY PAYS $10,000 TO SETTLE JUSTICE SUIT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 16
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 14, 2000
• Sequence Number: 31
• Publication Date: January 15, 1982
• Content Type: NSPR

ARTIONO0r84,1:44 Release 2001
Oki PAGE
1
i
Colby Pays $10,000 to
Settle Justice Suit
William Colby, former CIA director
and author of "Honorable Men: My
Life in the CIA" (Simon (1 Schuster),
has settled out of court with the gov-
ernment over a publishing incident in-
volving his book.
Colby agreed December 28 to pay
the U.S. Treasury $10,000 to settle the
dispute over the publication of a
French version of his book without the
deletions that the CIA had ordered
during a review of the manuscript.
Although Colby's book was pub-
lished in 1978, it wasn't until after the
U.S. Supreme Court decision in anoth-
er CIA-induced case, against agent-
turned-author Frank Snepp, that the
Justice Department's civil division
brought the action against Colby.
Colby had signed the same contract
that Snepp had signed?to allow pre-
publication review by the CIA.
During testimony before a congres-
sional subcommittee last year, Colby
explained the incident that led to the
suit: "I sent a draft to the agency and to
the publisher (Simon & Schuster, in
August, 1977) with a note that the agen-
cy was going to review it and that there
probably would be some alterations we
would have to make before publishing.
bP91-00901R
STATI NTL
They had arranged with the French
publishers who wanted the material;
quickly, so they Xeroxed it and sent it.
When the agency negotiated changes, I
passed them to my publisher to edit
from the manuscript. He did, but forgot i
to pass them along to the French."
After the Supreme Court ruled in
1980 that the CIA was within its rights
in requiring prepublication review of
manuscripts of current and former
agents, the Justice Department, at the
CIA's urging, brought action against
several authors. Most of the cases have
been settled by allowing CIA review or
by making restitution. More than '
$120,000 in royalties Snepp earned
from "Decent Interval" (Random
House), which started the issue, have,'
been turned over to the Treasury.
The agreement, which the Justice
Department termed, "full and com-
plete," has five parts. The government
would not prosecute Colby; any review
it made of a Colby manuscript would be
completed within 30 days: Colby would
submit all future writings for review,
including texts of speeches that relate
to the CIA; Colby would not contest
"his obligation to abide by the CIA
policy statements or regulations on pre-
publication review"; and Colby would '
pay. H.F.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
SAN JO.'iE IlEaCURY (CA)
Approved For Release 20041/013i07 3.-trA-RDP91-6CTur.,""Alrqd-wvik"
defends secrecy
Ex-CJA chief:
Democrac
needs spies
By Linda Goldston
Staff Writer
When former CIA Director Wil-
liam Colby gave a talk recently, he
was asked if the United States
shouldn't assassinate Libyan lead- '
er Col. Moammar Ithadafy.
Colby, who said he doesn't "be-
lieve in assassinations anyway,"
saw the incident as "a rather inter-
esting reflection of the difference
of the world of today." ,
"Five years ago, we were quite '
horrified that we may have done
something against them," he said. -
Colby told the story to a few
reporters at the University of San-
ta Clara on Monday and used the
same sort of analogy in describing
the CIA "of the old days" and the
CIA of today, ?. ,
,
No control "- -
- -
"For the first 20-odd years of its -
existence, the thought was that it
(the CIA) should not be controlled,""
he said, "but there's a contradict
tion there between the old idea of a
little spy service operating totally.?
at the president's or, the king's
, cr,!!gC,F'tt:
Mereury
William Colby compared the 'old. days' Niiith.:CrAIoday,:
-
the premier's knee and the concept by, who was aA director from
of the modern American intelli- 1973 until he .was fired by Presi-
gence service" - - - dent Ford in 1976. The checks and
Sooner, or later, Colby said, the balances he cited included "a pub---i
contradiction had to be resolved, lie document that says what intern-
"and I think we resolved it in the gence will do," having a clear
worst possible way, with lots of chain of accountabilityand having
histrionics and sensationalism and two committees of Congress "end-
recriminations, but resolve themtled to know the secrets."
we have "We even have a special court
Now, "we have applied our sys- which reviews applications by the
tern of constitutional checks and intelligence service for such things ;
balances to intelligence,", said Col- -
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
2-
Approvedifer ERAIegtie
zens even ,when they go abroad,"
he said.
Colby defended the need for se-
cret intelligence-gathering by the
United States.
"We have lots of secrets in
America," he said, "secrets of the
ballot box, secrets of the jury sys-
tem and secrets of all the other
things. Why? Because democracy
won't work without those secrets.'
By the same token, he said, "De-
mocracy won't work without some
, secret intelligence-gathering in the
world in which we live.
"The questions not whether you
have secrets, because we have lots
of them. The question is .how you
control the organization that has
those secrets?.
When asked about former CIA
agents Edwin.P. Wilson and Fran-
cis E. Terpil, indicted last year for
? illegally exporting arms to Libya,.
Colby said suchincidents have to
be put into perspective. '
"Out of the tens of thousands of
people who have gone through the
CIA in thelast 30-odd years, and it
really is in the tens of thousands,
? there have been a few bad apples," ,
he said. certainly.-think Wilson
and Terpit are bad apples.'!. also
think, William Agee is a bad ap-,
pie
Agee, 'a formeragent; is a harsh
critic of- the,agency, who lives
abroad to avoid prosecution for re-
vealing the names of agents and
writing without advance CIA ap-
proval.
Despite' that i- Colby said he be-
lieves present laws are adequate to
deal-with the problems presented
by former CTA agents committing
crimes..
: C lkiREIR9fte00010a1RG045-60770031 -5
cover the kinds of problems these
people. have presented." he said.
"Now, the fact you're not able to
capture them is a limitation of our
legal system, but it isn't limited to
CIA people. It's applicable also to
murderers and bank robbers and
everything else. If you can't get
your jurisdiction, you don't send. a
hit squad after them."
In fact, Colby said he. hoped
Agee 'doesn't . "step in front of a
truck someday, because you know
who will be blamed for doing it."
Agee's."continued good health or
moderate health is a .-reflection
that.we're not the kind of organize-.
tion people sometimes say we are,
because if there's a candidate for
retribution; he's 'it."
However; Colby said, "the re-
markable thing" about the CIA "is
how few bad apples there have
been."
Colby described the threat of the
Soviets and others trying to obtain,
Americantechnology. as "a matter,
r of concern. but it's-not a matter oft'
total panic"' - -
-"Efforts. by the Soviets to get .a
free ride: on our technology are
much there," he said.
Preventing such free. rides "is a
difficult challenge," Colby' said.
"You ; have; to seek Some reason-
able way of reacting,to- a reason-:.
' able problem and not say it's all or,
nothing......: We don't-want to closes'
up the whole industry. and say it .r
I can't go outside the United States?'
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000iaalli1-5
RADIO TV REPORTS, INC
4701 WILLARD AVENUE, CHEW CHASE, MARYLAND 20015 656-4068
FOR
PUBLIC AFFAIRS STAFF
STATI NTL
PROGRAM . Frank Ter-pi I : Confessions sTA11ON WETI
PBS
of a Dangerous Man
DAM January 11, 1982 9:00 PM CITY Wash
SUBJECT Fu I I Text
STATI NTL
DANIEL SCHORR: Tonight, the story of an Amer
tive, Frank Terpi I, who 16 months ago fled from a 53 ye
for supplying arms to terrorists. He tel Is his story f
in Beirut.
Good evening. I 'm Danie I Schorr.
Terrorism looms in our era as a greater threat than war.
It causes world leaders, including President Reagan, to live in
suffocating cocoons of security. Terrorism operates from safe
havens, like Libya. Colonel Qaddaf 1 is oil wealth buys the in-
struments of terror and the know-how to use them. Some of that
comes from this country, Ameri can know-how at the service of
America's enemies.
Veterans of America's clandestine wars have turned to
set I ing their ski I Is and contacts in the marketplace' of vi olence.
Prof it ng from terror without suffering qualms takes a certain
mentality. In the next 90 minutes, you will get to know one of
the merchants of terror more intimately than has ever been pos-
sible before.
NARRATOR: On the morning of Monday, December the 22nd,
1979, undercover detective Nicky Gri I I o reached the 27th floor
of this New York hotel. On that morning, he was wearing a wai-
ter's uniform borrowed from Fortin' Ts restaurant. He entered
this room. Inside was a squad under Detective Sergeant Mery
Woike (?).
MERV WOIKE: I was here that day with Sergeant Rosen-
zweig and six detectives. We brought at I the equipment we thought
we would need for that day_, which included four shotguns. We also
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
OFFICES IN: WASHINGTON D.C. ? NEW YORK ? LOS ANGELES ? CHICAGO ? DETROIT s AND OTHER PRINCIPAL CMES
STATI NTL
PART II -- MAIN EDITION -- 7 JANUARY 19
ARME
.a0a mss? SGA
ew W.OW4w4
AL PECEMBER 1981 7 JAN 82) Pp . 28 ,
National Security and the Competition for 32-35
Influence in the Third World
WHEN WE THINK of our nation's security
over the next 10 to 20 years, the military
threats that face us are obvious. It is not
neivs that we dropped our defenses over
the past 15 years. To carry a $25-$30
billion-a-year war in Vietnam on a con-
stant defense budget, we sacrificed the
normal replacement and growth of other
weapon systems. And we arrived at the
end of the 1970s somewhat behind the
curve.
We particularly allowed our conven-
tional forces to atrophy. We had a great
national rejection of military service after
the Vietnam affair and we turned to the
volunteer army, which has substantial
weaknesses. But the Soviets, even though
they didn't have a war to fight during these
years, spent an additional 3% to 4% of their
GNP every year building their forces,
especially their nuclear forces. Thus
today, the most optimistic person feels
that they have reached essential equiva-
lence with us in these terrible weapons.
But even the most optimistic person can't
talk about equivalence when we talk about
conventional military forces. Admiral
Gorshkoff began to develop some years
ago a little coastal defense force to today's
Soviet blue ocean navy present in the
Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans.
The Soviet tactical air force, which used
to consist of a couple of wings tied
together with twine and a bomb slung
underneath it, now is a very effective
tactical air force in Eastern Europe which
more than matches ours in numbers, if not
yet in quality.
Most importantly, the Soviet army has
modernized and increased its forces-
partly to meet the Chinese problem as well
as increase the amount of force that they
can manipulate and use against the West-
ern front and NATO.
So it's clear that we do and will face a
very substantial military threat from the
Soviet Union.
Other Threats
We must also worry about other mili-
tary forces in the world and their potential
for use against our allies and our interests,
if not ourselves. China, with a billion in
population, is determined now to modern-
ize not only its agriculture, industry, and
science, but also its military forces.
But I look beyond the military threats to
our national security: we have political
threats, as well. The political threat to our
alliance arises when 200,000 young people
gather in Bonn to denounce any kind of
nuclear activity by the American side of
the equation. Of all the obscene things in
the world, people are protesting the
by William E. Colby
American presence in Berlin right in front
of the awful wall which is representative of
the alternative. Dangers are also arising
within many of our allied nations -from
fundamentalist Islamists who reject
modernism and wish to march resolutely
into the 13th Century-to the ethnic and
regional differences that divide countries
formerly cooperative.
These ethnic differences appear not
only in the Arab-Israeli-Palestinian prob-
lem, but also in many other areas around
the world affecting relationships we've
had with countries such as Spain.
There are also economic dangers:
? We've seen our energy sources cut off
and others raised in cost.
,4110=6,91.1111111111101
Today the most optimistic
person feels that [the USSR has]
reached essential equivalence
with us in these terrible weapons.
But even the most optimistic
person can't talk about
equivalence when we talk
about conventional military
forces.
405009910
? We've seen our people line up in gas
lines.
? We've seen the impact of high interest
rates which now threaten the financial
relationships of the developed world; and
? We've seen trade protectionism begin-
ning to rise, with threats of unemploy-
ment, and continuing inflation problems.
But all these dangers-the military, the
political, and the economic threats-are
comparatively understandable and man-
ageable.
My major concern is with what we
might call the sociological threat to our
national security. Some three-quarters of
earth's humanity now live in the so-called
Third World, where 600 to 800 million
people live in absolute hunger and
poverty. It's expected that the present four
and a half billion population of the world
will increase to about seven or eight bil-
lion in the next 20 or 30 years.
As a result, pressures on food and on
livelihood will continue to increase. This
creates a sense of frustration as the people
of these lands look at the enormous gap
between their problems and our af-
fluence. They look at us with feelings of
envy, frustration, hostility, and bitterness,
William E.
Colby is the
former
Director of
the Central
Intelligence
Agency.
as they see this gap increasing between our
two societies.
They then look around for tools and
weapons to secure what they think would
be a more equitable division of the world's
wealth, so that the favored of the world
will not live in oligarchic splendor com-
pared with the unfortunates who live in
squalor. Some of them look for economic
weapons to achieve a better balance of the
world's wealth through embargo, cartel,
boycott; trying to find economic weapons
to alter the way the world has distributed
wealth to date.
Was it a good idea for President Reagan
to tell the Third World in a speech made in
Philadelphia to try to emulate the Ameri-
can experience? I think that it was good to
take the initiative in bringing some real-
ism into this debate with the Third World,
between the North and the South. Other-
wise, you leave the initiative to those who
say, why don't you distribute the wealth of
the world in a new, international eco-
nomic order-which isn't going to happen
and then everybody gets frustrated. The
answer to Third World problems is not
solely confined to distribution of wealth.
It's to be found in the creation of wealth in
those countries. This is an important
message to get into the debate. It's not
the only answer, of course, but it is an
important part of the debate.
in this search for development, some
countries seem to have succeeded and
some haven't, and there must be some
answers in the differences.
Some, in an effort to change the balance
of wealth, turn to politics and political
threats as weapons. Political demagogy
arouses the hostility of the masses against
the great Satan. Some offer simplistic
solutions of turnover of resources. These
advocates apply all the higher forms of
hypocrisy as they criticize us, yet turn a
blind eye at the way our adversaries in the
world ignore and exploit them.
They do not admit the degree of assis-
tance that comes from the affluent West.
The criticism is that America is 15th
among the world's developed nations in
its rate of contribution, and that the US is
e2001/03/07 : CIA-RD91TOCHIONVOMMOOTE-5 8-F
7-F
11 ?
MUT 10 40
PART II -- MAIN EDITION -- 7 JANUARY 1982
teale-20011CW07-:-CIA.Ript"91--posetRee
. ? on . anarchy. is will continue a in et r- now, outsi
minate period?I'd say another year or
two. Eventually, as it really comes apart
and the economy runs down and the un-
employment goes higher and the country
just isn't working, a group of colonels
(there are few generals left, they shot
? most of them) will reach in and say,
enough. We've got to get some discipline
back into the situation. And we will see
the rise of some kind of authoritarian
leadership, probably talking about being
modern Islamic rather than antiquarian
Islamic. It may occur after the Ayatollah
Khomeini passes away to his reward.
In a way, Pakistan is an example.
Pakistan got itself into quite a turmoil,
politically. Eventually the military moved
in to try to assert some discipline, and
used the tenets of Islam as part of their
appeal for discipline to stop the kind 3f
anarchy that they saw ahead of them.
A New Dimension in Security Threats
We must recognize that there is a very
new dimension coming to the kinds of
national security threats that we face. In
previous years great power was only pos-
sessed by a few nations?those which had a
large population base and a large eco-
nomic base upon which great power could
be built. But science and technology have
changed this in recent years, and are
producing great power in small packages.
Some of those packages are nuclear, some
chemical, and some are biological. These
small packages are threatening to prolif-
erate into the hands of reckless despots or
leaders who not only would be willing to
threaten but even, potentially, to use that
kind of great power to secure a change in
the balance of resources in the world, and
in order to carry on their attacks against
the great Satan that they see as the source
of all their problems.
From these problems of the Third
World, there is a very definite threat to our
national security. If we had a hostile army
on ships off our shores threatening to
invade our country, our entire armed
forces would be alert, our police forces
would be active, and our nation would be
contributing to the defense of our country.
Well, there is an invasion of our country
in progress: Something like a million
people a year "invade" this country. This is
not a hostile army, but it is a result of these
kinds of sociological problems in the Third
World. Illegal immigrants from Mexico,
the Caribbean, and elsewhere are coming
into the US by the millions. They repre-
sent in this generation exactly the experi-
ence of our forefathers in earlier years.
They came to this country to seek a new
life away from the deprivation and frustra-
tions of the potato famine in Ireland or the
hopeless futures that they faced in Scandi-
navia, Italy, Greece, or the Ukraine. All of
these people came to this country seeking
a better life for themselves and their
families.
These same kinds of people are coming
only spending a few hundredths of one
percent of its GNP on this kind of assis-
tance?ignoring the fact that Soviet assis-
tance is entirely military to their friends,
and its economic assistance is infinitesimal.
Indeed, subtracting Cuba, North Korea,
and Vietnam there is almost no Soviet
assistance to the Third World at all.
The Soviets said that they didn't want to
come to the Cancun meeting because they
said the problems of the Third World are a
result of capitalist exploitation. So there
are no contributions from the Soviets on
ways to increase the wealth of the Third
World. They'll just wait until it turns to
socialism.
These political attacks on the United
States are combined with what one might
call the sabotage of some of the institu-
tions which these countries say produced
the present disparity between the poverty
of the Third World and the wealth of the
developed world, especially America. The
various international institutions, multi-
The Soviet tactical air force,
which used to consist of a
couple of wings tied together
with twine and a bomb slung
underneath it, now is a
very effective tactical
air force in Eastern Europe.
national corporations, or international
bodies are attacked and sabotaged for
hypocritical reasons. The World Health
Organization, UNESCO and others are
the scene of criticism of the developed
world and its allies and its friends around
the world, rather than vehicles used in-
telligently to bring benefit to the poor
world.
America was forced to retire some years
ago in simple self-respect from the Inter-
national Labor Organization because we
were so criticized there despite our great
free trade unions. Those forums today see
an increase in this kind of rhetoric, instead
of calls to improve the structures and the
free institutions of the deprived parts of
the world.
Now some of these nations?and this is
where our national security is very directly
involved in the most traditional way?turn
to concepts of violence: Either that care-
fully targeted, narrow violence we refer to
as terrorism, with small groups aiming at
the choke points of this delicately tuned
Western civilization, or the broader crowd
turmoil and excitement that we've seen
on our TVs, as the world is led to denounce
the great Satan for every kind of problem
that some local demagogue finds imped-
ing his road to power.
Iran, for example, is going through a
spiral downwards, a gradual increase in
immigration system. The
problem is that we have gone through a
similar invasion in more recent years,
which compares to the kind of invasion we
are facing today.
In the 1920s the rural poor of our South,
facing frustration in the future that lay
before them, moved to our northern cities
in a huge migration. Now, these were the
people who were deprived; who were put
upon in their local areas. These were the
people with enough gumption, enough get
up and go, to move out of the South to the
Detroits, the Washingtons, and the New
Yorks, throughout the North and North-
east.
That was a racial migration. And the
racism in American life never adapted to
that change. We allowed ghettos to form in
these northern communities and tensions
to rise as a result of that racism and those
ghettos.
If we look at the migration going on
today we see more ghettos arising. We see
the separation in our communities. We
There are no contributions
from the Soviets on ways
to increase the wealth of the
Third World. They'll just wait
until it turns to socialism.
don't see the degree of integration that ac-
companied the arrival of the Western
Europeans among their relatives and
friends in the earlier years. We see a
culturally, frequently racially, and
certainly linguistically distinct group
moving into this country.
We are already seeing the strains and
pressures that this is putting upon our
urban communities in a variety of areas,
not just in California and the Southwest,
but in Texas, in Florida, and up through
the central part of the United States, as
well as New York.
Now, I'm not saying that this is all bad
because, again, I say these are very good
people. They're the ones that have the
spark. They want to go and do something
ritw, to better their lives. But it certainly is
an invasion and it certainly has in it the
potential for the kind of social tension and
social strain that we experienced in that
earlier migration in the 1920s and '30s. We
handled that one so badly that its costs
have almost been infinite; both socially,
and in terms of agony among our people.
And we still haven't solved the problems
that resulted from that particular invasion,
today.
Immigration is a very serious problem.
It's not going to be stopped by a barbed
wire fen,..e. We can talk about immigration
controls all we want. And these people
will come through them. What's the
solution then? If we put up the barbed
NATIONAL SECURITY. . . Pg. 9?F
Approved For Release 2001/03/073:-CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
PART II -- MAIN EDITION -- 7 JANUARY 1982
347-i-criA-RD,P9+-90.901-Reeesee00ee1re-
NAT S ECUR on
wire, we're going to
have an awful time
with Mexico. They,
with quite a bit of
good reason, have
some doubts about
the way we've treated
them over the last
century and a half.
We stole half their
country, let's face it. And some say this is
their vehicle for getting it back. But I think
it's a little more complicated than that.
The answer has got to be jobs in Mexico,
and again this is a difficult problem. Al-
though the Mexicans have run into a high
degree of capital recently with oil, they
have spent a considerable degree of that
capital on such things as petrochemical
plants, which will employ only a couple of
hundred people, or a steel mill which will
employ only a couple of hundred people.
Now, if this is the kind of invasion we
face, then are we going to solve it by
armies? Are we going to solve it by stop-
ping ships in the Caribbean and herding
them back to Haiti?
I don't think so. The capacity of these
good people with this kind of spark to get
through those kinds of barriers is, again, as
infinite as it was for those earlier settlers
here, who came across in other leaky
boats into this nation, and faced the
dangers that they faced.
I think that we have to look more
broadly. This is a sociological threat to our
national security, and it ranks with the
threats to our national security that we see
in our diplomatic, military, economic, and
political relations with other countries.
The sociological threat arises from the
world of difference between the affluent
and the poverty stricken.
This is the most proximate national
threat that we face. As we look at the kinds
of problems that we see from the military
threats, certainly we have to improve our
national security. Certainly we have to
improve our armed forces. I think we have
to be very careful, however, before we
identify every threat and every problem as
only the emanation of something directed
and run from Moscow. Indeed, some of
the activities that threaten our country
certainly are Moscow controlled; for
example, the activity of the Soviet diplo-
mats, and the activity of the Soviet intel-
ligence services with their disinformation
campaigns designed to denounce our
American efforts to make friends around
the world. There are other Moscow-run
operations, perhaps not directly run, but
through their proxies?be they Cubans,
Libyans, East Germans, or Yemeni, who
carry on the work of the Soviets in the
Third World?to stretch into these areas
and try to create damage to our friends,
and advantage to Moscow's friends.
We also see a very conscious effort by
the Soviet Union to look for situations
which they can exploit, even though they
may not have produced or formed them.
? ? ?
inue
What we need for our national security is not offensive tanks,
but the kind of antitank and tank defense weapon that
our technology can produce, that can kill tanks but not
require us to have the same kind of weapon the Soviets have.
They protest, "Look, Ma, no hands," and
yet move into some situation that offers
the chance of exploitation. We see the
Soviets filling vacuums in these kinds of
situations in Libya, in Ethiopia, in Central
America. This kind of threat is not a
military threat but it is a more subtle
threat that we must attend to.
The Need to Refocus Our Sights
Now, what is our response to this kind
of a world in which we're going to be
living? We have to look and realize that
this is the world we live in. We can't be
"Pollyanna-ish" and we shouldn't be
totally fearful. We shouldn't give up the
game, but we shouldn't focus our attention
only on certain aspects of the threat that
lies before us.
Certainly we need to focus on the mili-
tary danger and the nuclear danger as well.
But equally well, our American imagina-
tion should be able to produce a David-like
slingshot to handle a ponderous Goliath
facing us. The worst prospect for our
country's national security in the years
ahead could be the construction of a huge,
cement-and-steel Maginot line which a
future enemy could envelop and make
totally useless, as the Germans did with
that huge investment France made in its
military security in the 1920s and '30s.
We have to see what the appropriate
weapons are. If the Soviets do have 50,000
tanks in their inventory and a good 16,000
or 17,000 of them in Eastern Europe, do
we need to match them? I say no. We are
not planning a charge across the steppes of
Russia to attack Moscow.
What we need for our national security
is not offensive tanks but the kind of anti-
tank and tank defense weapon that our
technology can produce, that can kill
tanks but not require us to have the
same kind of weapon the Soviets have.
If the Soviets have several hundred
attack submarines, do we need the same
number? No, because we're not going to
attack the Soviet sea lanes. We need some
attack submarines for action between
fleets. But our objective is to get our con-
voys to Europe and Japan. And for that,
we need effective antisubmarine warfare,
which requires a totally different kind of
weapons system. We must not be misled
into feeling that if the Soviets have x-
number of submarines, we have to have 2x
or we are doomed to defeat.
If another country spends 15% of its
GNP on its military forces, must we spend
15% of our GNP on our military forces? Or
can we ask our people to be more imagi-
native to get a more effective weapons
system out of a smal-
ler expenditure. If the
Soviets want to spend
large sums on air de-
fense and things of
this nature, which our
computations show
cannot really be effec-
tive for the purpose
they're designed, do
we have to spend equally large sums on
weapons systems which won't be equally
effective or cost-efficient?
I think we have to look at these weapons
systems to choose which are effective for
our purposes and not be led into a blind
attempt to copy everything our Soviet
adversaries might present.
In the political field, the political threat
that we see around us, and the attack on
our alliances, is part of our national
security too. We need to spend some time
worrying about our alliances and how we
relate to our alliance partners. Ambas-
sador Robert W. Komer has done some
very imaginative work on how coalitions
and alliances should work together so they
can match each other's contribution, and
not feel that an alliance has to be a dis-
ciplined military force, following the
orders of the alliance leader. It can be
something more Western, more demo-
cratic, if you will, in its relationships as it
faces the problems that it sees. It doesn't
have to have absolute answers for every
question, but can go through the process
of consultation, cooperation, and collabor-
ation.
We do have to see the internal dimen-
sions of the political threat that arises
within the countries that we are friendly
with. The Shah of Iran was overthrown not
by a Soviet force, but by internal forces.
There are hostile internal forces loose
throughout the world. We need to identify
the nature of those forces and how we can
work with, and sometimes against, such
forces for our national security. Because
people clothe themselves in the cloak of
religion doesn't mean that we have to
respect them, no matter what they do, no
matter how many executions they carry
out, on behalf of that religion. We have to
be able to identify those political dangers
and work with our friends, work with
those countries to contain those?threats,
not only to their security but to our
security.
Another country that now looms as a
political question mark is Egypt. Does the
new government of Egypt have a chance of
continuing the kind of national support
that President Sadat had? Will it stick to
the Camp David peace agreements after
next April, when it's supposed to get
the rest of the Sinai back?
The chances of President Mubarak suc-
ceeding and maintaining himself in power
are quite good, not absolute, but quite
good. It depends largely upon the army.
He comes out of the military?the air
force? and the chances of his retaining the
NATIONAL
SECURITY P
pprove or elease 2001/03/07 ? t IA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
10-
PART II -- MAIN EDITION -- 7 JANUARY 1982 ,
auxtsoutonasculazanau_
T.
0
icontr,d1 f the military and therefore
aterniiining in power are quite good.
CutiatiSly,, popular support is secondary
tto reontrdl Of the army, because this is
not a country that operates on the basis of
tfl.wille open election every four years. It's a
aountry in which power has been concen-
dtated forthe last .2.0 or 30 years and where
tthe leaders of the .government use the
towns cif government to continue to get
support or at least acquiescence of the
tPenPle?
Ihresident Sadat wasn't all that popular
elnettg fairly substantial groups of the
people. So be it. He was in power, and
in some of these countries that's the
key, because they run their countries dif-
ferently than we do,and tharsiusta fact of
life.
As to whether they'll stick to Came
.David, I think the real question will be
Whether they can. The problem will be
ithatin order to stay in power and to stay in
-some kind of relationship with his Mu-
tusk's] Arab colleagues, there has to be
-some movement on the 'Palestinian issue.
Jt doesn't have to be solved?you're never
doing to solve it totally but there has to be
forward movement on it.
J think that the forward movement will
ldepend ingreatpart on the Israelis, and in
the Israeli ,govemment you have some
wary thard-line ',people in a -very strong
sposition at the ,moment. Thus it's very
%dimwits to jsusthowfar the,rthink they can
4;0 in:terrns-orfurther steps toward resolv-
i4 the Palestinian issue.
An -early --test will be whether they so
through willythe turnover of the-rest of the
'Sinai, and woultlAuess that thy prob-
ably will. /Rut then the issue of further
slInIgr,ess on the Palestinian negotiations
'mall he the main stibject Of our concerns
-mart spring.
fin the economic field, we have to use,
nmaginatively, some -.of the sinternationtd
institutions to solve,some Ciftheahreatsto
our national security; be they :threats of
talleasy or inflation. The International
itteretlialy Pond, the =General Agteetrient
"eonTariff itc Trade, sthe Cluartization for
&monde Cooferalion antiDevelopment
Mutt focus on these economic threats to
dhesecurity of all cif Us, keeping the inter-
stattionsal economic system moving ttlie,ad
*ref scilving the problems -before ,it.
tWill we help countries which are not in
our ,direct economic interest? I :think
Ave',ve rlone guite a lot of that in :helping
eetainries Where tion'tgetony pattico-
tlar benefit other Alan that aountry's
assuming a ,general role in the world
economy. Welve certainly :helped in the
svok df the Peace Cows end some-other
iprqgrams in areas which really sometimes
are -quite hostile to us in our .pOlitical,
emit etten economic, relationships. We
lhavatia sualied overt? help anyone who
aaysate's our enetrty...Audit don't think we
Ilhotild. But on Abe other hand, I don't
*elk w.e've demanded cath tanthe barrel-
head from these countries in terms of our
help.
In the sociological area, which I think is
the most important, there are tactics and
techniques to solve these problems. We
can use our influence and 'bring out the
facts of our experience toward develop-
ing solutions and reduce the level of
There is an invasion of our
country in progress.
Something like a million
people a year "invade"
this country.
frustration and provide the hope of better
solutions. As we look at these dangers, we
have the chance topoint out that there are
some parts of the world that have made
progress in solving these sociological
problems.
One area of the world, with nosnatural
resources whatsoever except a disciplined
and vigorous people, has .arisen from
absolutely flat on its face a rnere .30 years
ago to the second largest econorny imthe
world today?Japan. There is &Mitt here
in =the way they,ve organized themselves,
produced the discipline to .expend that
effort.
Neighboring China spent 'the dast 30
yearsenasseri es of will-o'-dhe-wisp-experi-
ments. At the end Alf that .30-year ;period,
theylvegone back to basics. They're talk-
iog about simple things like pragmatism,
and =they've given itp the great cultural
revolutions and the "great leap forward"
and all the rest. Because during the time
that they weregoing-off on those.demago-
think we have to he very
fusaaffid, Ibieffilre we -Weill*
every threat end every pull:dem
as only the emanation 4
something directed, and run
born Moscow.
gicapproaches, the Japanese were making
steatly,progress on a real level.
This lesson is not confined -to that one
example. As we look around the world we
see success in some areas and failure in
others. And there is a high coincidence
between the ones which are successful,
which have adopted a constitutional
structure of government?not, say, purely
democratic, but atasically constitutional,
structure df ,political government. And
they have adopted a concept of open enter-
prise on the economic side.
On the other hand, other nations -very
deliberately over these yearshave reached
for panaceas for great, regimented socie-
ties politically, where there is tosal
discipline and a very clear party line. And
in the economic field, they have tun -sscl to
doctrinaire solutions to the problems of
development, management from the
center under the national plan, and the
periodic live-year plans. The contrast has
become quite remarkable, not -only
between Japan and China but between
North .and South -Korea, between Singa-
pore and Burma, and between -Hong
Kong/Taiwan and the 'Mainland. ?It-is also
evident between other countries right
next to ea dh other like Kenya and T. 1-
zania and Tunisia and Algeria?despite
the Algerian wealth in oil. You see it in
western Africa -between the tvory Coast
and Guinea. Even in theWestern world,
between countries like Colonibia and
Cuba (which is an economic disaster and
would not exist if it were not for regular
subvention and the excess prices paid by
the Soviet Union for its sugar).
It has become more and moreclear,that
there is a .difference in the way these
countries have approached their socio-
logical problems. Some seem towork and
some seem to fail. Certairily there is a
need for official development assistance.
And this has been made available, as
President Reagan has pointed out. There's
no Shame in America for the huge
amounts -of assistance that the 1.JS has
provided in seconomic -terms around 'the
-world and in the various programs of
'bilateral and multilateral support. There
is-ama-ed for-this kind?of officialassistance
to the least developed and the most
'seriously affected nations Which cannot
'pink themselves up alone. There is also a
needfor public funds to provide the infra-
ginieture, the roads, and the ports, upon
-which the other efforts of development
c:an then begin to build. But this is not
-enough.
There must also be a possibilityaf-real
-development. And this must be found in
the private sector, in the area of invest-
ment. at is popular to look tat* on the
period tifUnitedfruit and !nand theUS
Marines in the Dominican -Republic and
in Haiti. Butthere is a new situation itrthe
world today and it is important to recog-
nize-it. The world has developed codes of
-,conductbetween the nations of the world
and for the corporations of the world.
There are codes of conduct for the way in
Which corporations will handle them-
selves in the less developed world. We
have imposed codes upon our business
leaders so that we can provide the benefits
cif that kind of capital movement and yet
draw back from the "bad" stories that
characterized the ,past.
And the United States 'knows the bad
stories. We know the role of the railroad
magnates in the early development of our
country and the great trusts that exploited
our people. And we enacted the various
corrective codes in the antitrust laws to
control these great monopolies.
NATIONAL SECURITY ...P?. 11-F
Approved For Release 2001/031W: CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
1--
NEWSWEEK 11 JANUARY 1982 (7) Pg. 11
A North Korean Scare
In the days following Poland's declaration of martial law, the
Pentagon took precautions against trouble that seemed to be brew-
ing on the otherside of the world. It all began when U.S. intelligence
analysts noticed that North Korea's winter military exercises were
much more extensive than usual, with more civilian participation
and a large-scale conversion of the country's transportation system
to military use. Some analysts feared that the Kim Il Sung regime
might be planning an attack on South Korea while the United States
Iwas preoccupied with Poland. The U.S. carrier Midway, which had
just unloaded ammunition to prepare for dry dock at a Japanese
port, was ordered to rearm in a hurry. The flattop then went back to
sea, heading for Korea with two escort Mips. The North Korean
maneuvers ended peacefully, but Washington has requested a
meeting of an international armistice commission to seek North
Korea's explanation for the unusual exercises.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
PART II -- MAIN EDITION
7 JANUARY 1982
1111???=1M.
A Spare-Parts Package for Taiwan
The Reagan Administration has reached its first decision on the
sale of arms to Taiwan?a controversial issue even within the
Administration. Congress will soon be asked to approve a $97
million package that would offer the Taiwanese no new weapons; it
would consist entirely of spare parts and replacements for the U.S.-
made planes and armor already in Taiwan's possession. U.S. offi-
cials expect the Chinese to protest strongly, just to show what a fuss
they would raise if President Reagan ever decides to sell more
sophisticated weapons to Taiwan. In fact, some Congressional
sources suspect that the Administration officials behind the Taiwan
deal are the same ones who oppose selling the Taiwanese the
advanced FX fighter plane?and who hope that howls from Peking
over the spare-parts package might cause the White House to drop
the FX sale.
WOMW?MMI ...... .Z.W.LIMMOW&VMJE,
NATIONAL SECURITY.. .Continued
That same process is going on as we face
the less developed world. It is very impor-
tant to recognize the contribution that this
kind of approach can produce. As we look
at the comparison between the three areas
of the world?Asia, Africa, and Latin
America?and compare the amounts of
total capital flow into those areas, we see
that in Asia and in Africa there has been
roughly two dollars of official funds
moved for development into those areas
for every dollar of private money. And
that's a recognition that it is essential to
help those countries get out of the
situation they've been in.
But in Latin America we find a rather
phenomenal difference. In Latin America
for the last many years, the contrast has
been quite the opposite. It has been $1 of
official to something like $10 of private
capital moving. That capital movement
into Latin America has also exceeded the
sums moving into the other regions of the
world. If a key to development is the
movement of capital (and it is one of the
keys); the training of local people; and the
raising of standards of health, education,
and life expectancy?you will find that in
figures issued by the World Bank, the
Latin American example has been more
successful than the other two.
I think the question of helping to
modernize a country that doesn't want to
be modernized is not going to be an issue.
I don't think the Americans are going to
force modernization on anybody. The big
experiences of forced modernization in
the world in recent years were in Turkey,
Japan, Iran, and other areas. These were
indigenous drives by strong leaders who
forced modernization.
Now, one can say that the American
example and the dominance of inter-
national media by the American image
compel people along this direction, but
think what really compels them is better
health, better education, better lives,
better food, better TV sets, or what-
ever for their people, That's the driving
force, not what the American people or
government decide to do about a country.
If a country wants to opt out of the world,
stop-the-world-I-want-to-get-off, fine. It's
all right with us.
As we face these sociological problems
and threats, we must recognize that
competition in the Third World is not
solely a competition between ourselves
and the Soviet Union. This certainly
occurs, but there also is a competition for
our friends and our friendship. Other
competition can destroy our connections:
It can create the kind of hostility that we
have seen developing in some parts of the
world.
A vigorous, positive program of devel-
opment can, instead, seize the initiative in
the world today. Instead of thinking of
matching the Soviet threat we must think
in terms of overcoming the sociological
threat. We must show solutions to the
sociological dangers and threats that exist.
We must attract the peoples of these parts
of the world to cooperate in meeting those
sociological threats. We must generate
cooperation so that we can move in the
best of alliances against the ancient
problems of poverty and disease and
misery that we see around us.
This is the strategy that can really lead
us to success, not only for our national
security but to the kind of success that
really represents what America means to
most of the world.
I like to judge countries by whether
refugees move toward them or away from
them. On that standard, despite all the
rhetoric you hear attacking America,
America still represents the real hope of
the world. It's up to us to take that hope
and put something solid into it. If we put
that kind-of solid cooperation into out
I like to judge countries by
whether refugees move toward
them or away from them.
On that standard, despite all
the rhetoric you hear
attacking America, America
still represents the real hope
of the world.
relationship with three-quarters of earth's
humanity, we can, indeed, take the initia-
tive. And we won't have to meet the Soviet
challenge or defend ourselves against it.
We can create a situation in which the
Soviets become irrelevant to the real
problems the world faces. They will be
pushed off the stage. We must still be
concerned about their military force and
their potential to lash out as they see the
decline of their ideological pretensions
anci their hopes for empire. But we can see
a strengthening of the world as a whole
against these problems ahead. Take the
Chinese, for example. They don't like the
Soviets. The Soviets have been really very
imaginative in how they've messed up
their relationships with the Chinese over
the years. They've just been masterful and
I think we can probably count on their
continuing to do so, because William
Randolph Hearst's view of the "Yellow
Peril" is about the average Moscow
citizen's view of it. He had Genghis Khan,
so maybe he had some basis.
All it takes is our imagination, and our
energies, put in the right direction?in the
direction of solving the real threats to our
national security in the years ahead.o*?
iNote. This article is adapted from a
speech made by Mr. Colby at George
Mason University on October 22, 1981.
IMIMENOM .... 21.14.012M1=0,11.
Approved For Release 2001/03/0714. 6A-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
Approved WiRelgaseVali/03(9,-hogIA:RpWAkfapinc.0500070031-5
'1W4. YORK poST 7 January 1982 Pg. 4 '
RON WANTS. 18% BQQ$11
PENTAGO
By NILES LATHEM the Union adress Jan
N.Y Post CorresPondent 25.
WASHINGTON - The Administration's
president Reagan yes- new goal in its war on
terday prepared to sub- inflation and high inter-
mit a new budget that est rates, officials say,
calls fo;? a whopping 18 is to hold runaway
per cent increase for budget deficits to about
the Pentagon and a $70 billion next year
drastic $30 billion cut in and about $55 billion
domestic spending, The for 1984.
Post has learned. Deficits are now pro-
White House and Con- jected to be about $152
gressional sources said billion in fiscal 1983 --
last night that the Ad- without new cuts.
ministration has almost White House spokes-
completed the new do- man Larry Speakes
mestic program that told reporters yester-
Reagan will offer to day that the President
Congress in his State of plans to hold a series of
Meetings with his Cabi-
net and top level eco-
nomic advisers later
this week and will prob-
ably complete the
budget by Thursday.
Although the package
Is still incomplete, sour-
ces said highlights in-
clude:
? An 18 per cent in-
crease in Pentagon
spending, putting its
funding levels at a
record $215 billion next
year.
? An $11.5 billion cut
in social programs, in-
cluding Medicaid and get the Kemp-Garcia
Medicare. However, So- enterprise zone bill
cial Security will he un-
touched.
? A $22 billion pack-
age of new revenues ?
a plan already outlined
by the President on
television late last year.
Several of Reagan's ,top
advisers are urging him
to seek even more tax
Increases but officials
say Reagan continues
to resist such proposals.
? Major new over-
hauls of the method
whereby the federal
government distributes
aid to states and cities.
? Cutting back on
food stamps and school
lunch and breakfast
programs.
? A major effort to
NEW YORK TIMES 7 JANUARY
Mideast
Policy
By Jacob K. Javits
ANINNIMMIN
? There is a clear line of policy to be pur-
sued by the United States in the Middle
East ? a line that has been reaffirmed
by President Reagan and the Congress,
that is contained in the Camp David ac-
cords of 1918, in United Nations Resolu-
tions 242 and 338, upon which the accords
are structured, and in the Egypt Israel
peace treaty, by which the" accords are
being implemented.
The alternative, which we as a nation
rejected, was 16 join the call of certain
Arab States and even some West Euro-
pean allies fdr an overall peace confer-
ence at Geneva. It we had adopted this
alternative Ole whole peace process
Would have failed in a welter of propa-
ganda and confusion. Egypt would not
have had a Chance to sign a peace
treaty because of the stubborn hoe-
bitty of so mtich of the Arab world, and
America *mid not have been able to
emerge as the main leader in promot-
ing Middle Eirist peace.
We are being tested, however, by the
Arab state, !Mich have opposed the
Camp David adcords and whose oil sup-
plies are Vital to Western Europe and
Japan and very important, as well, to
the 'United States; by some leaders in
West Europe who still hanker for Gene-
va; and, most recently, by Israel itself.
iseI s unilateral action in annexing
the Golan Heights?a stet, it considered
essential to its own security ? produced
the United States' support for the United
Nations* Secutity Council resolution al-
through Congress this
year.
The bill, first prop-
osed by New York Con-
greasmen Jack Kemp
and Robert Garcia and
embraced by Reagan
during the campaign,
offers a series of special
tax incentives to en-
courage businesses to
relocate and hire resi-
dents in depressed
urban areas such as the
South Bronx.
Kemp told The Post
last night that the
White House bill is
"weaker," than the one
he proposed. But he ex-
pects changes to be
made by the time the
proposal is sent to Con-
gress.
??????5?0????=i00?????a.eMINOINNISIMM1001.14101.11..00?111.11101111011.1?10?0?111??????=411.?111?11
1982 Pg. 27
leging the''illegality" of the annexation,
which in turn led both to an aggrieved Is-
raeli rebuttal to that support and a note
of discord with American policy.
Even more perils are added when we
hear warnings that debate on these
issues by Americans, including Jews,
deeply concerned with United States and
Israeli security threaten to encourage
anti-Semitism in the United States. This
notwithstanding, the fact is that Ameri-
cans, including Jews, have not only a
constitutional right but also a duty to ex-
press their views on issues of Such grav-
ity to our country's security and to en-
deavor to persuade other Americans. We
would have thought that Nazi genocide
had put an end to speaking too softly or
not speaking at all on such matters.
Obviously, America must neither
apologize for rejecting the Geneva ap-
proach nor lack assurance in working
for the Camp David accords; nor must
the friends of Israel. Very delicate and
portentous negotiations are now being
conducted among the United States, four
of our West European allies ? Britain,
France, Italy, and the Netherlands ?
and Israel concerning the makeup of the
international peacekeeping force that
must come into existence with Israel's
final withdrawal from Sinai. If these ne-
gotiations succeed, it will help give a
new impetus to the Camp David peace
process and the prospects for renewed
progress on Middle East peace. If these
negotiations founder, the central
achievement of the Camp David accords
? the Egypt-Israel pzace treaty? could
be placed in doubt, for a failure properly
to resolve the issue of the international
peacekeeping force could affect Is-
rael's final withdrawal from Sinai in
April.
In particular, it is important that our
four West European allies should coop-
erate without seeking to turn America
away from Camp David. Any Ameri-
can association, explicit or tacit, with
statements by the Europeans that are
substantially incompatible with the ac-
cords would cloud our own position of
steadfastness and fidelity to them. This
could undermine progress in the re-
sinned autonomy talks concerning the
West Bank and Gaza, which must con-
tinue. It would be fruitless to pretend
that there are not important differ-
ences of perspective and even of impor-
tant national interests involved.
For Europe, dependent on Persian
Gulf oil ? and desirous of, and depend-
ent on, detente in Europe ? war in the
Middle East must be avoided, for all
hope of successful detente is likely to be
an early casualty, ending Western Eu-
rope's confidence in the future of any
arms-limitation talks.
For Israel, the issue is, starkly and
simply, its very national existence. For
Egypt, fidelity to the Camp David ac-
cords provides the hope for continuing,
under President Hosni Mubarak,
Anwar el-Sadat's brilliant peace initi-
ative, with the next step being recon-
struction of Egypt's economy and pri-
vate enterprise. And certainly for
America, and for the Reagan Adminis-
tration, there can be no underestimat-
ing the importance of avoiding a
breakdown of the Camp David accords
over participation in Sinai peacekeep-
ing.
Given our North Atlantic Treaty Or-
ganization relationship with Britain.
Farm, Italy, and the Netherlands, our
prospective "strategic alliance" with Is-
rael, and our contractual role as a full
partner in the Camp David accords, the
United States must maintain the lead
and the momentum of this peace process
as its best Middle East policy.
Jacob K. Javits, Republican of New
York, served from 1957 to 1980 in the
United States Senate, where he was a
member of the Foreign Relations
Committee.
313,3M-2113114,/,,,,,33,3,1G4 3, TA3 333,13, (1,3 el ?111 .33 23.1 3.. VIA r..,11111
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 :41-A-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP9111111-00901r
ART 1: CLE APPEARED
NEW YORK TIMES
1 JANUARY 1982 STAT
ON PAGE
Colb3,7 to Pay CIA. $10,000, Settling Disput
WASHINGTON, Dec. 31 (AP) ? Wil-
liam E. Colby, former Director of Cen-
tral Intelligence, has agreed to pay
$10,000 to the Government to avoid being
sued for breaking a secrecy agreement
involving a book about the Central Intel-
ligence Agency, the Justice Department
announced today.
The $10,000, Mr. Colby said, is ap-
proximately what was earned by the
French edition- of his 1978 memoir,
Honorable Men: My Life in the C.I.A."
Mr. Colby, in accordance with his se-
crecy agreement with the intelligence
agency, submitted the manuscript to it
for clearance. A number of changes and
deletions were requested, which Mr.
Colby made for the English-language
edition.
Uncensored Manuscript in French
In the meantime, however, Mr::Col-
by's publisher, Simon & Schuster,,' had
sent the uncensored manuscript to a
French publisher, which published it.
The C.I.A. did nothing about the mat-
ter until this year, when it asked the Jus-
tice Department to consider litigation
against Mr. Colby. , By paying the
$10,000, the former. Director avoided a
lawsuit, the department said. Under the
law, the Government can confiscate the
royalties earned by an author, who
breaks a secrecy agreement.
Mr. Colby, reached at his Washington
law office, said he did not mind paying
the $10,000 because he agreed with the
need to tighten up the agency's security
against disclosure of classified informa-
tion.
"I have no problem in helping in the
process of tightening up," he said. "If it
requires a contribution from me, so be
It. It's for a good cause."
Second Step by Administration
The action against Mr. Colby was the-
second public step the Reagan Adminis-
tration has taken in its effort to "tighten
up."
Earlier this year, the Justice Depart-
ment revoked a set of guidelines pub-
lished by the Carter administration.
Those guidelines restricted the circum-
stances under which the Government
would sue a former official for breach of
secrecy.
The old guidelines stated that the
breach of secrecy had to involve a sub-
stantial compromise of the national in-
terest. By revoking those rules, the cur-
rent Administration has left itself the
option to sue for any transgression,
The French edition of Mr. CoIby's
book disclosed that a C.I.A. spy ship,
Glomar Explorer, whose existence had
been previously known, had failed to re-
cover nuclear missiles, steering or
transmission devices or codes from a
sunken Soviet submarine in the Pacific
Ocean. That disclosure did not appear in
the English edition.
?TheNewYorkTirnes
William E. Colby
r>tr!
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
1,1
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R00
ARTICLE APPEARED
ON PAGE /49?t6
BALTIMORE SUN
1 JANUARY 1982
director
to forfeit pan
of book profits
By Waiter-Taylor
Washington Bureau of The Sun
STATI NTL
Assistant Attorney General J. Paul _McGrath, who
heads the department's civil division, said it was the CIA's
view that this dissemination constituted a breach of Mr.
Colby's obligation to the government and recommended
litigation against the former CIA chief.
Neither Mr. Colby nor his attorney, Mitchell Rogovin,
was available immediately for comment.
Mr. Colby, however, signed the settlement agreement,
acknowledging the violation. Copies of the agreement
were released by the Justice Department.
? Under it terrns;14.r. Colby Is t.ci-pay the government
,f $10,000., which knowledgeable Oofirces said yePOsedted
L.-the approximate, 'proceeds. . from ;overseas sarelto th#
Memoirs. Mr Colby-also-agreed :th submit' any *further
Washington?A former CIA director, William E. Colby, writings about the CIA to government censors prior to
has agreed to forfeit $10,000 of the profits from the unau- publication.
thorized vublication of a book4about his days with the For its part, the government agreed to drop any fur-
ther legal action against the former intelligence director.
..
agency+ to the government, the 'Justice Department an-t
,
flounced yesterday. t.,,.. . . -. ,,... .By comparison, the government, during the Carter ad-
. . ..
out-of-coiirt settlement was the first case of its
kind since_airiannounced Reagan administration crack
down on: iniapproved disclosure; by`Jorrner and current
goyernment employees.
Administration sources indicated that theColby case
was Intended as an example of the Justice Department's.
willingness to puoue its new get-tough poliey to the high-
ministration, sought and won federal court approval to
seize all the royalties from a book critical of the CIA writ-
ten by a former agent, Frank W. Snepp HI. In the Snepp
case, the manuscri/4 was not submitted for. CIAsensor-
ship.
The government's authority to go' after the proceeds
from such unauthorized' writings was upheld by the Su-
preme Court. The Carter administration, however, estab-
et levels of- government, even in cases where no serious lished guidelines that limited instances in which this
. breach is alleged. ? power _would .be. used, :weighing, ?among .other. things,
- According to the Justice Department anno-tmeement in whether information disclosed was classified:or potential-
the case, Mr. Colby violated a secrecy agreement required ly harmful to U.S. security.
of all Central Intelligence Agency employees by causing Earlier this year, Attorney General William French
the dissemination of a manus&ipt of his agency memoirs Smith announced that the Reagan administration 'was
without pre-publication screening by the government scrapping thole rules and would seek to restrict all' irn-
? The statement said Mr. Colby sent the manuscript proper disclosures by current or former government em-
simultaneously to the CIA for screening and to his publish- ployees, even in instances in which no explicit vow of
er, Simon and Schuster. Although Mr. Colby made clear to secrecy or serious security breach were involved.
the publisher that the book would have to be subject to any ' ' " ? - ' ? ? ---
CIA-ordered changes, the company distributed.the manu-
script to a?French publisher, according to the statement.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07.: CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP9a0A0050
ARTICLE APPEARED THE WASHINGTON POST
ON PAGE 43 1 January 1982
ormer iui
f Sett es
ispute. o1'4
By Mar Y Thornton
Washingtal Post Stan Vhiter _
eeret
. ,
? Former directOr,.. William
...Colby has agreed'to pay the govern-,
ment $10,000 to settle a dispute over..,
whether.). he .. violated. his. secrecy
? agreement by:.r., publishing a book!,
without, CIA. epproval,? the.? justice,-
Department said yesterday..
? Colby's payment of. $10,000 and
pledge in thefuture to obey. the CIA .
secrecy ,agreements he signed. in
1950 and 1958 is a "full. and corn-.
plate settlement", of the dispute axis--
ing from the 1977; iiitblication Of,
"Honorable,. Mem.; MT. Life in the
Deputy Attorney. GeneralEdWird
Sclunults said the _Settlement be-
tween Colby and the department's
civil division was,reachecl Dec. 28.
Schmulta said the secrecy agree-
ments required Colby, as a former
employe, to seek approval from the
CIA before publication of any clas-
sified information.
The settlement said that although :
Colby's publisher, Simon and Schus-
ter, received the manuscript with the -
understanding that publication was
subject to CIA review,.the publisher ?
distributed copies, toia French pub-
lisher before . certain sensitive pas-
sages Could be deleted by the CIA.-
Assistant Attorney General J.
Paul McGrath,- head of .the Civil di-
vision, said yesterday' that the CIA
I considered: ColbY's publication ar-
rangement,"a breach. of Colby's [se-
creel,/ obli tio?HeTsaidthe CIA
had, referred the:Matter to-the-J?s
- tice Department ' asking that a:
suit against.Colby be consider--1
". The settlement ';agreement binds
7; Colby- to his original promises. "not
to publish or participate in the pub-
. lication of. any. information or ma-
!Aerial relating. to: the agency,: its ac--,
:tivitiee or intelligence activities gen-
erally" without agency approval.;-:;;?.;
The government contends that all..
CIA employes and.- former employes
are bound by such agreements-4...
Approved SergReleastisbala0A/Etiifir-
; former CIA'agenti...in.iecent'YearS'
!for , publishinvi information ; about
?
WILLIAM COLBY
... must pay government $10,17/00 ?
CIA activities. without- deb:ranee
from the agency.
The Supreme Court, :in a -land...
rnsrk decision, upheld a goveniinetit -
charge that-, former agent -Fralik
Snepp violated his position
when he published a book abt5.utft...F4',
U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam with'-,
ocuitk fir, o,...:bta_ 713771,
SnePii WaOrder.ed to tznyrSo
the government $140,000 in Iiioffek
from the book, "Decent Interialk"'-'1,"'
: CIA-RDP91-00901R000500070031-5
TATI NTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP
.A_PPEARED THE WASHINGTONIAN
ON PAGE January 1 982
- -
And No More Office Hours,. No More Traffic Jams?
But if You. Decide to Change Your Life, Be Prepared to
? - -
Come-to Te. yam: Spouse, and Yourse
.... -
: - ..- -.,. . ? ,.?...i.,1--,:ierty -or-..Wintergreerr or- other-one-day in junior high school_ I said I
.1.aki.on weekdays,, when there:- - f ? :!,'Okay," he -said.;;,`.1've got a_ Cali-
t.-5 ---?:....- ..... ski. on
no.liftlines. I go. to California once ?fomia box. and some fonts, and .you can --
..,....?...,,, L..,t?,,,,,,,.._1-4.7.,...--,...it:?t:a.: year to ski with my son theski histruc- -.. set the poemsand. print them, and I'll '
ornetimes-1;feerifall;'. when the.::..iveather. is good . teach' you how-to bind them:. _You -can ,
the- only:w-hole-inati:ae?reuriion..:i?-i-,and.the tourists are gone,-I go toEurope......-".Sell them in the cafes, or if nobody'll .1
___... _
-ot the-EightBrigadeAlia*tifon alMonth,.;always,spendingpart of it ', 'huy thern, you can give them avoay.".. ..-
? -arms.and.legS.,..,.-My-tWo eye*-are:if-;li.in; VeniCe::,..4'.:...i.'!"-:.;1:47:"."-':-.1-':*,!--.F::.'-1,.-=o--:'..7?t:i.."-. Perhaps I should have stayed. Or per--
i..-7patchless. ..Myflesh;;althougtrrm,53-larick-Therer.dre two draWhacks,..iVio??,pay----.:?. haps not. In-any...case; I came
counting;.. ii,uncinfeied:47.7---:,. 7"
..-.-?7:;''.':,-.--r-;s?3, ,-,z"-,naintitiii. my happineSs,'?Mywifenever:.,7', finished school, and became aneWsman, -:
Aroun& ine-Tare:thei'COmrades-:-With.;;V??anted. Me to do- this,"-_axid.
no; as she which is What I stayed for 27 years-:1A1 I
i-: Whom I. have rnade,thePa.ssaaePeriloilii',';'--beains:t0 flburishindependently,_she may:-.....- the while, on -iny own time; I was writ- 1
t??? on ce.cel ebratedd-eporters:.;fr.Oiiiqhe,Inot Want this new-me despite our better -.."- in rl: -unsuceessfut poems,. moderately -
. . , . . 0
&:?-?
C ? Washington Sta"r-4Whci:ate-.co4krayitte , ' . :_thiti'30 year together ..'And;. because, I ' .:: successful short stories; fairly successful-.1
. ...
:..... and on the dole; P.Rinen who-servedhalf.Z.:,:-live given up the shared byline.with Jack - -. novels?and then, in 4976, a very sue-7,
'.- a dozen -adriiiiiistationi ably---n7 Ow,,hrO41:7.-. Anderson:, that appeared in hundreds of -?': ceSsful novel.- '.",--- .--_-... :7.-- .:.,-:-.
n, Reaganited;'Orretired Onhalf--pay:;:!..r.newspapers;itis harder-to 'Sell my books. '. ..;.:?..;;-When Conflict4e Interest sold_ to a .1
;:-.. pals'fronifOrnierlY^Well:ftnided-dOtgood.4...,-;-;t; But,. overall, as a voluntarY dropout I paperback publisher for 5360,000,- if
i_outfits--
.-noiv;,cratching'for-;.:cqrtspltir:tg.aM,happier than I have.ever been in my " . which.' got half -an
, d the advance for
, .-,--
-?,"-jabs.:?-,HoW7*tildllifei haveundOnso :-.,%.1ife;.-1-arri content and, terribly grateful to ' _. Sometimes a Hera, my subsequentnovel, 1
_ , ...
,- many?-Iiiv-41-tifqiry.-";dro' Po-nist..-7...;,.....,..7....;.z.r,,4,..;.-god-,- everithoughl am-not sure He, She, .. 'netted me S75,000, -I knew I could start J
t.:::',7..-.:',fit-?.ir.O6Tjtey4-is or are'Ouvthere-,-.. I. alsce .: ,.selling poems- in cafes: i - _ - :?-:.i:'..- .i--, . -A
,.i:....Ifipend my raornitias at hornEeliotisi.,'":7,ktiO.4;).'and. this qualificatiOn...Seernsr es-----.. ', -::.,?''.- The way I added it upl.vas that, barring I
f.: is mineniy..aalnctrl: Mortgagelew /ting-sential;.' that- it may not -hit,' ?:.-.:1"--"..::7,'::: --',...-.': -:..?inVeitrnent disasterS; the book money plus 4
1 dom. First,--.I:dO:rily back-strengtening h :-!;,t-,-'-ri':-Pi?it.::d:f-;,------;,- .,, ...:. i -
-.---i2-."7-.S.'f.:?:i--J..,--:::_ - :what ray ? frugal -Wife and I had saved
.,, ..? --, - , ? ??? ? .
.::.:. exercises. to ...repair. dise...!niuscleptilledi:if?NeWsivdi my provender Until i'dropped . mould let me use Without being a salar-- ".
by:so muctr-golff..MyWife- and-SorrhaVe-_-: -Cmt-i realized I wasn't had at it on the :. ied worker-ataymore, -;.; .-. :-. : ....: -.... .. - ..?:-.'.'
il.? ' - - - - :- ' their breakfast.''":. ? ? " -
,
'?:-, left - too- feverishly- to .-,Washengton?Positin the late-450S and early .7; :. Iii. the. summer of 1977; I went to _ a-7....
`,?,, dishes., rdo.thent Q",-...,--.?....t,--,,..---,...P,:?-,-,--,?:.160s..-Later;Ivith Hearst; I didWell. "When - 7 et:invention. of Investigative Reporters and.-- I
:I grind mi6Offee:teani in iny fatfter"SftDievi Pearson died;I:became,jack?An--:..: Editors, a group - Jack .and I had .helped I.
.t
;.-.
-?-, ancient- eleetriC"-grin-dei-3He hitibeitisieia ::.:-...dert-oh!-sTicleAnderscitiA.riever..cheated.- ::- found and which I had- named,. Its- ac-
20 'years-fi Soinetimi:S,'F-talktohiriiaS;d Jack on time-, doing my- books. on weeki-.:::-:ronyrrt is IRE Those hundreds of eager:I:7
fliakethec-offee;FDdWriStairS'in .pakellIeridscheitin,s,r,. if anyone-, mY, family :;.; :eyed o youn rip- Orters made me think that -.
? ... ...
ikaffide-; -Lturir:-..6reene;_f'.Of thre'Cl.a.isicil.7-1:-.Iarily early years With Jack, he once said ,there_werecLes Whirxitsall over the.place
.:.,..,
r stations' hop. iiaif6iktiliarii?':haii4,-?Witti.,-,,.,'-_:E.to--ine:?-;.*.;,A*!;.:i?'H f-'11:1*---------A-!.:41-;',--2---;3172,i.v5.4c for Jack to ertlist if he warded to-:-2------i"-t-ir4
. .Rkhard,StranssltWisCettaiii .fronidli.e-':?..7.7.`......`":=NhYi-yopld, a, person: Want- to he a....., - '.:--":,- -- .,',-:,-'-- ...
bush] c>s,, pige-i:.thaiiijqiinCilosia7 his; :b4ii:::::IsecOnd-rate: novelist when he cm be. a.?:":. On the plane baEilo-WaShingtori,1 sugt,V3.
,Z:forther deplitid;'::.biii thitinpinebini:-Is),.:T,f4-sf-ratiepprter?'!..: I- waLs. never. good - gested to Jack that maybe he ought to
. - _
1.,.....-?, . _ .
._
L.:Still. shakily,adequite I.,_writ_seis4:41,e:tt_:.er,o4t,76.her :has right,tobe fit-sit-rate. r.410. rte. r,-;. though groom somebody else as his number one
two, an agenda,foethiday-.-5;.:-..--itdi.,,Fa. .. ? , .about my. being. a second- .... man in -case I burned out But he didn't71
is.-f,...4.- . -Then 'to. tha'rnain thing my ,?:"erratett novelist ? "I don't know '?!- I said .-Z-understand or didn't want to Then,-.- in
... ,-- - ,:;.... --.? .. .._ - ?7 ?:.:.r... . ' ? . '. , . . " ''.
?..which does not quite',Work yet; r.nytrari;,..y,But -I did know.-- .,-,.--..c.--..- -"!.- -i,-,-':,..:-; October of that year; I asked him to lunch.
I lations of Baudelaii(L&Fleurs n.e;arly..7---14:1. had wanted to be -a poet:since I was : We went to Trader_Vic'-% his turf..7'1-:=
...1..doni);:my.pypr. tibeins;, an articii.4"re-, i.7:177.:::.,IyherliwaS 21 between my junior ' '? ' 'Now: here f.was-- with : a roan 'loved 1
..-*'?-view; A shorp.ifory::.,-'4';', %'-----''-'4-''ja-nd" ertior.: -years at Lehigh ;-I, went .to- ? and respec" ted; whoseg,00d opinion' va.1 4
- .,:: 4 - ?-? - -
.
vOttier Clays tgolf With-a-siiii ciiftiepd'-' -,,,: PariS; and took my poems to:. Raymond - . tied greatly, a man who had riven me- 4
,,,,?,- ? . v-f
, ..
. ,
,.......cycle witiOnycWifemtNertnoii -.h.?ce,A1::rnune
. .
-,
FaoligiunchAtoo:gralleigck94 . elgath 4 '...thMingraiP119.....wt ely circul2tentnin: in America... ..,"--4:1
08b41/6 .
portant and .:*1
some,haniliome-woinali.I'Ve.likeltifiair; and hair bands. He read my noems. -:cause elf h;rn. 7 .?-,?. --..:____
t , ?
L.'litit with.:?dinaleZfokFtlinte'd:b2;"tirne:.-andgiVen to wearing togaioSandals, long : ,', ".:: He had anointed. me as his heir; be-
with
Approved For Release 2001/03/07: CIA-RDP91-00901R000500(RML
AIC
(American Investment Council)
January 1982
? (11) Sometime within the next 10 months, it will be announced that a
Soviet spy ring has been operating at the highest level of the U.S. Government.
The traitors will include the long-rumored 'mole' in the CIA (who will turn out
to have been a key aide to former Director William Colby). ..at least one member
of the Carter White House. ..and others in the Departments of Justice, Defense,
and State. The first break in this case came from a high level defector within
the Romanian Embassy and it is now fast unraveling.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-IRDP91-00901R000500070031-5
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-00901R00
STATI NTL
GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS REVIEW
January-February 1982
STATI NTL
Tin FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT AND TH
INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES
STATI NTL
Athan G. Theoharis
Department of History, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233
Abstract?The author challenges the claims of intelligence agency officials for ex-
empting their agencies* files from the FOIA. Noting that the FOIA's mandatory
search and disclosure provision alone permits access to the range of intelligence
agency files, the author cites the separate filing and "compartmentalized" records
policies of the CIA and the FBI. He concludes by challenging the adequacy of con-
gressional oversight without independent historical research.
Since 1979, one of the principal legislative objectives of the Federal Bureau of Investiga-
tion (FBI) and of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has been to exempt their files from
the mandatory search and disclosure provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
of 1966, as amended [l]. These agencies' claims to the contrary, there is no record to date
that legitimate national secrets have been compromised because of the FOIA. This is not sur-
prising since the Act already contains a "national security" exception which exempts properly ?
classified FBI and CIA files from public disclosure. The FBI's and the CIA's proposed FOIA
exemptive measures, however, would effectively preempt scholarly research into the past
history of the FBI and the CIA at a time when such research. can only now be initiated.
Until the mid-1970s, because CIA and FBI files were absolutely classified, scholarly
research into the history of these agencies was virtually impossible. Unlike journalists,
historians and political scientists need to have access to primary source materials?inter-
views, press conferences; public testimony, and selectively leaked documents clearly do not
meet the exacting standards of scholarly research. Yet, for example, all FBI files dating from
the World War I period were classified, including those documenting the FBI's August 1923
investigation of the fraudulent Zinoviev Instructions. In addition, in the early 1960s, FBI of-
ficials successfully pressured the National Archives to withdraw from Department of Justice
and American Protective League files deposited at the Archives all documents and copies of
documents pertaining to FBI investigations of the World War I period [2].
The problem is not simply over- and indiscriminate-classification. Were that the case, then
?-these proposed amendments to the FOIA would not cripple historical research. Under Ex-
ecutive Order 12065 (and formerly E.O. 11652), historians can submit mandatory review re-
quests to obtain declassification of improperly and no longer justifiably classified
documents. Yet, to employ the mandatory review procedure, the researcher must be able to
identify specific classified documents and be generally aware of particular programs and ac-
tivities. As a result of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities' hearings and
reports, however, we now know how limited, even h-relevant, had been our knowledge of past
FBI and CIA activities. Experts of the Cold War years might have been aware generally of
the preventive detention program instituted under the McCarran (Internal Security) Act of
1950 and lasting until congressional repeal in September 1971. We now know that, without
STATI NTL
STATI NTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP91-0090