THE DCI'S ESTIMATES ADVISORY PANEL: THE QUESTION OF PUBLIC IDENTIFICATION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91M00696R000500160009-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 17, 2004
• Sequence Number: 9
• Publication Date: June 29, 1976
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Rele', dIH`MAY&ln-
OLDUSIR0160009-6
MEMORANDUM FOR: D/DCI/NI
SUBJECT The DCI's Estimates Advisory Panel:
The Question of Public Identification
1. The following views probably run counter to current con-
sensus on the question of identification of Panel members. These
thoughts are influenced by experience with the stable of consultants
regularly used to advise on National Estimates from the '50s to the
early '70s. That group had many distinguished members, as well as
lesser ones. It was predominantly academic, drawn mostly from the
Ivy League colleges at first -- though broadened in later years.
The relevant point here is that privacy was maintained virtually
without exception for 20-plus years. Had it not been, it is doubtful
that the group could have been recruited or kept going -- even in
those days.
2. Conceding the considerable PR and other advantages of pub-
licly declaring the establishment of a panel; conceding also the dif-
ficulties of making public the existence of a panel and then keeping
some or all of its members anonymous, I nonetheless wonder whether
the anonymous option is not still, on balance, the least troublesome
formula.
3. This view derives chiefly from the pitfalls I see in a
panel, all of whose membership is to be publicly named:
a. Some proportion of desirable candidates (I would
suspect quite a few) would be pleased to have a quiet, consultant
relationship with CIA but would rather forgo it than be publicly
named. (This includes some who are now in consultant status.)
b. Some of those most willing to serve publicly are not
the most desirable or needed types, e.g., professional patriots
and status-seekers.
c. To name all names would be to excite invidious compar-
isons, professional jealousies, etc., among those not invited.
In the cattier circles of academia, foundations, and perhaps the
business-industrial world, this could cut several ways -- but
Approved For R
IMPOW 6C11~190500160009-6
 Approved For R fi41
@Iei3 CIf + l 1
MM
So
chiefly against the Agency and those Panel members chosen to
the exclusion of others.
d. Once a panel was established and members made public,
it would tend to take on some attributes of a "Board of Visitors"
-- its members inevitably feeling some responsibility for judg-
ments in the estimates. This could quickly lend itself to press
exploitation and other hot potatoes. On routine papers, there
would be no problem, but on controversial issues, known members
of a panel may be hounded by press or Congress (or Congressional
staffers) on their views and their roles, etc. If Panel members
agreed with key judgments, they would feel pressure to defend
themselves; if they did not, they would be tempted to disasso-
ciate themselves. In either case, it's a juicy news story.
e. The above problems in turn would create others between
the Panel members, on the one hand, and the DCI/NIOs. On sexy
issues ("Are the Soviets going for a first strike?" or "What are
the long term intentions of the Italian Communists?") the ques-
tion of who was chosen from the panel to participate in the
critical estimate, why X was chosen in place of Y, was the jury
packed?, etc., could all produce problems among Panel members
and between members and the DCI's office.
f. No one should hold out hope that the press or public
will make or appreciate much of a distinction between an advisory
panel oriented to analytical/estimative judgments and one with
less prosaic concerns regarding intelligence.
4. Perhaps I exaggerate these fears, but I think them tolerably
real, and I'm sure that some valuable potential Panel members would
even more so. I therefore suggest the desirability of allowing for at
least some anonymous Panel members on the following principle: to let
invitees know that the existence of the Panel would be public knowledge,
that some members would be chosen who are willing to be acknowledged,
and that the Agency would do its best to assure others of privacy if
they want it.
National Intelligence Officer
for Western Europe
Approved For Re /$ :.CIf1"9O1f1p0500160009-6
 Approved
Approved
F i MaMsVT /
DATEss,,,,~~~
CIA-KDP9~1111'9~1~000
TO:
D/DC
ROOM NO.
BUILDING
REMARKS:
In regard to
tomorrow's meeting
on the Panel
System and the
question of
publicity, I've set
down what se
em to me the main
talking points for the anonymous
option.
FROM:
NIO/WE
ROOM NO. BUILDING
EXTENSION
or Release 1004/05/13: CIA-RDP91
M00696R000
00160009-6
1 FORM 55 24 I REPLACES FORM 36-8
WHICH MAY BE USED.
00160009-6
(47)