Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!arms-d From: arms-d@ucbvax.ARPA Newsgroups: fa.arms-d Subject: Arms-Discussion Digest V3 #29 Message-ID: <6849@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Tue, 7-May-85 23:53:40 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.6849 Posted: Tue May 7 23:53:40 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 9-May-85 01:25:17 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 288 From: Harold G. Ancell Arms-Discussion Digest Volume 3 : Issue 29 Today's Topics: Intelligence More KGB ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Moderator Subject: Mail system progress and idea on Grenada Weapons mystery Things seem to be getting ironed out. I know I can't say "If you don't get this message send me mail...."; however, everyone should be receiving their copy. Please send me mail if there are any problems. A friend of mine pointed out a possiable reason for the Administration hiding the existance of the bulk of the weapons captured in Grenada. Perhaps they (the weapons) made their way to some group (such as the contras) that the Administration didn't want to openly supply with Made in U.S. weapons. - Harold ------------------------------ Date: Mon 6 May 85 12:29:29-CDT From: Don Stuart Subject: Re: Arms-Discussion Digest V3 #27 I think Jeff Miller has missed Mr. Hoffman's point. I will grant that the reports generated by government analysts contain much better guesses than anything Cockburn or the rest of us could generate. Certainly the dribbles of information that reach us have often been altered to protect sources and so forth. The difficulty for us, as Miller seems to confirm, is that they have also been altered to fit the political needs of various groups within the government. I would like to believe that such alterations do not occur before reports reach policy makers, but I know that is not true. First, there is probably some fudging for internal purposes: Casey, the JCS and everybody else have their own agendas. Second, ultimately WE ARE the policy makers. I have to decide who to vote for, what ideas to support, in order to do my 1/200000000th share of running this country. Therefore I must take what I can get and try to remember that ALL of my sources of information are badly flawed. Miller also says: So the argument that goes: "so what if the KGB is influencing my cause as long as its right?" is empty because it fails to recognize that the KGB isn't helping fund and organize because it is concerned with peace or morality, but because it is a handy means to harm the US. Say what? This claim seems to rest on two assumtions: 1) Anything that is bad for the US is wrong. 2) The KGB is an infallible judge of what is bad for the US. The first is arguable, although I think not quite true. The second is nonsense. Perhaps we should be suspicious of anything the KGB approves of, but I am not about to give them a veto over my opinions. Don ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1985 8:44:18 EDT (Friday) From: Jeff Miller AMSTE-TOI 4675 Subject: More KGB I must apologize I only get to these things as I can, and it dawned on me that I had not answered the question you raised about Active Measures in relation to groups or movements. Groups are penetrated by operatives intent on a. seeking to recruit Agents of Influence, and b.using the activities of that group to influence public opinion, influence government, disrupt normal functions of commerce and government, provoke reaction from police and other governmental organs, shape and direct where possible the ideology of the group as a whole, manage the public relations of the group (propaganda) such that the target government is always presented in the worst light, and the government of the Soviet Union is presented in only a favorable light. Soviet operatives usually become very popular within groups. By pretending to espouse shared beliefs the operative feeds the egos of individuals in the group. By providing guest supporters with impressive credentials, the group self-esteem is played upon. Very often the "distinguished physicist" or whatever is a KGB operative with no factual credentials whatsoever, posing as a whatever after extremely extensive coaching. When actual professionals are used, they are KGB personnel. Most popular of all are the funds that can be provided.... the KGB has access to funds that would bring tears to the eyes of a CIA spook. Penetration of groups is accomplished through myriad organizations, in existence already, or created especially for a given operation. Thus groups tend not to suspect that they are dealing with KGB. The KGB manages a veritable multinational conglomerate of peace, labor, social-welfare, and in typically ultra-cynical Soviet fashion, religious organizations. I mentioned one very active KGB organization in my sarcastic letter of a few days back; the World Peace Council. Established in 1950 as an anti-nuclear weapons group before the Soviets had developed viable nuclear weapons, it was expelled from France in 1951 for being an espionage base and from Vienna in 1957 for subversive activities. Later it quietly reopened a satellite in Vienna clled the International Institute for Peace. It is headed by Indian Communist Romesh Chandra, an operative of the KGB. In its 32 years, this * World * organization failed to make any comment on Soviet suppression of E. German workers in 1953, Hungarians in 1956, Soviet abrogation of the nuclear test moratorium in 1961, the installation of missiles in Cuba in 1962, the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, or Afghanistan in 1979. It has *never* criticized a single Soviet armament program. This organization has developed a large sympathetic following in the US, to include the congressmen I named in the previous letter. It boasts 36 allied or otherwise sponsored organizations in the US. It has provided guest speakers like Dr. Radomir Bogdanov "of the Soviet Academy of Sciences", who has spoken at a luncheon in the House of Representatives during a WPC sponsored " Dialogue on Disarmament and Detente." He is Colonel Bogdanov of the 12th Department, with an unearned doctorate, whose name was placed as author on several works by real Russian scientists in order to construct his "legend". Other names familiar to attendees at freeze rallies are Yuri Kapralov and Georgi Arbatov - who may be familiar to watchers of ABC's "Nightline" on which he regularly appears to present the Soviet viewpoint as director of the "Institute for USA and Canada," operated by the International Department, KGB. Both are officers of the KGB. I would recommend reading of; Soviet Active Measures: An Update, Special report no.101, Bureau of Public Affairs, US State Department, July 1982 Forgery, Disinformation, Political Operations, Soviet Active Measures, Special report no. 88, US State Department, October 1981 ( Both above include debrief exerpts of KGB defector Major Stanislov Levchenko ) House Permanent Subcommittee on Intelligence hearings; April 1978, February 1980, July 1982. * Example of Obvious Sign of Disinformation Influence : Australian physician Helen Caldicott who has no criticism of Soviet arms policies - in fact who has nothing but admiration for Soviet intentions - claims that the US is THE villain of the arms race. J. Miller ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 85 18:33:12 EST From: Herb Lin Subject: KGB and Influence [From J. Miller - Moderator] It must be understood that during development, the subject is not aware he is dealing with KGB. In most cases the operative either passes himself off as a private Soviet citizen with counterpart views, goals, beliefs, etc., or as a third country national. But then what does the subject do to give the KGB person leverage? A person with access to classified information shouldn't be talking to anyone, regardless of whether or not the person to whom he is talking is recognizable as a KGB agent. Often the Soviets try to combine the roles of Agents of Influence with espionage. This has brought them some successes that we know of, but also some disasters, since many people who would allow themselves to be blackmailed into influence draw the line at selling secrets. Please give an example of "influence" that does NOT include selling secrets. In your response, please refrain from using examples such as "voting against cruise missiles in Germany", since such positions can easily be justified on grounds *other* than being victims of KGB influence, (e.g., a member of the German Parliament might have thought that putting missiles at sea would have been more sensible). I am curious about your questions about the KGB and finding missing kids. Are you aware of something I'm not? I doubt it. I'm saying that Soviet support of a cause doesn't *necessarily* mean that the cause is one that Americans should not support. Point is this: It is not relevant to say "what's wrong if the Sov's pour money and support into (--- fill in the blank with any undeniably worthy cause---) if its a worthy cause?" because unless that cause can be worked to the Soviet's advantage, they won't use it. I guess this is my primary objection to your position: you assume a zero-sum game: if the Soviets want X, then X must be a bad thing for the US, for any X. I don't subscribe to this position, though I do welcome evidential challenges to it. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 May 85 18:52:06 EST From: Herb Lin Subject: More KGB [From J. Miller - Moderator] Groups are penetrated by operatives intent on a. seeking to recruit Agents of Influence, and b.using the activities of that group to influence public opinion, influence government, disrupt normal functions of commerce and government, provoke reaction from police and other governmental organs, shape and direct where possible the ideology of the group as a whole, manage the public relations of the group (propaganda) such that the target government is always presented in the worst light, and the government of the Soviet Union is presented in only a favorable light. Many people try to do some of these things (e.g., influence public opinion or government, and shape and direct where possible the ideology of groups with which they are associated). They also criticize (often severely) the U.S. government for doing things that are silly. Does this mean that they are potential agents of influence of the KGB? I doubt it. Harold Brown and James Schlesinger don't seem to me to qualify, though you may have information we don't have. Penetration of groups is accomplished through myriad organizations, in existence already, or created especially for a given operation. Thus groups tend not to suspect that they are dealing with KGB. The KGB manages a veritable multinational conglomerate of peace, labor, social-welfare, and in typically ultra-cynical Soviet fashion, religious organizations. My own bias is not to believe any group from the S.U. Thus, KGB association per se is irrelevant. ... the World Peace Council failed to make any comment on ... Soviet abrogation of the nuclear test moratorium in 1961.. I don't know enough on the other Soviet misdeeds you mention, but I do know about the so-called abrogation. In December 1960, before resumption of Soviet testing, the U.S. stated that it would no longer be bound by the moratorium. (This does not take away from your general point.) ...This organization has developed a large sympathetic following in the US, to include the congressmen I named in the previous letter. I follow with great interest a variety of "peace through disarmament" movements. I also follow with great interest a variety of "peace through strength" movements. Am I subject to "improper influence" or do I get to make up my own minds about things? (Or is it part of KGB "cleverness" that makes me believe the latter while the former is true?) Other names familiar to attendees at freeze rallies are Yuri Kapralov and Georgi Arbatov - who may be familiar to watchers of ABC's "Nightline" on which he regularly appears to present the Soviet viewpoint as director of the "Institute for USA and Canada," operated by the International Department, KGB. *Of course* these people would give the "official" Soviet line; why would anyone expect anything less? It isn't a whole lot different than Cap Weinberger or Ken Adelman going around and making speeches about US policy. Thanks for the references you gave us. * Example of Obvious Sign of Disinformation Influence : Australian physician Helen Caldicott who has no criticism of Soviet arms policies - in fact who has nothing but admiration for Soviet intentions - claims that the US is THE villain of the arms race. I'm afraid I agree with you here, at least to some extent. Certainly Caldicott is one-sided. An intellectually respectable argument can indeed be made that the US is the primary mover in the arms race, but she doesn't make it. (A different argument with the reverse conclusion, also intellectually respectable, is possible as well.) ------------------------------ [End of ARMS-D Digest]