-- - -.. 

USCIBI 9.2/9 

'l:'9P SEU!l'f 

• REF ID:A5811 • 

T01" SBG:R:ET 

8 NovembeJ' 1954 

MEMCRANDUY FOR THE :MEMBERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: 

Ref'erence: 

C(J[INT Capability Against Chinese Cormnunist Communications. 

USCIB 9.2/s dated 29 October 1954. 

The enclosure hereto is circulated f'or inf'ormation and consideration in connection with ref'erenoe and item 6 of' the corrected agenda 

o:f the l09th Meeting of USCIB to be held Friday, l2 November 1954. 

USCIB: 9.2/9 

TOI." SEORE'E 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 03-21-2014 pursuant to E. 0. 1352B 
• REF ID:A5811 • 

rO:r.u SBORET 

November 5, 1954 

'l'OP SEGB!'l' 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE MEMBERS OF USCIB 

Subject: Amendment of Draft Memorandum for the Special Committee or the 

NSC 

Reference: USCIB 9.2/S dated October 29, 1954 and its enclosed Draft 

Memorandum for the Special Committee 

Since receipt of the referenced Memorandum to the Members of USCIB 

as :;.·1:rliised at the last meeting and of the draft Memorandum to the Special 

Committee, a further study has been given to the Board's recommendations, 

which were drafted at the meeting on 26 October. It appears that in 

ref erring to the conclusions in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the draft memorandum, 

USCIB, in recommendation 6a, is asking approval of the following program: 

1. In the negotiations at the present level for intercept base rights 

and for full cooperation by the I I organizations the US will 

offer only' equipment already promised, elementary training and cash, plus 

a promise to pass on any information of an impending attack. 

2. In the event of failure to obtain any.part of the requests on 

these terms an approach will be made tol I 

In addition, the language in both these paragraphs concerning~ 

pro quo 'When combined with references in paragraph 2 to "maximum pressure" 

supported by 0 integrated US policy'' strongly suggests that approval is 

being requested for the following further steps: 

3. In the approach toh f the US will not increase its offer 

in any way but will informim tha \if the US fails to obtain the requests 

on the original terms, US support in\a.11 fields will be reduced or withdrawn. 

4. If I IJ:"efuses any part of\the requests, US support in all 

fields will be reduced or withdrawn. 

The Department of State member recommends that U'SCIB reconsider 

forwarding a paper on this subj·e. ct to the 'necfa] joTM .... · • ttee at this time. 

In the matter of intercept base rights the_ _to date have not been 

responsible for delaying negotiation. s. Th, \IJS reapjr .• · ements were not 

presented until the end of September. The _ . , replied within about 

two weeks and raised several points, none of which, appear unreasonable. 

In ad.di tion, since the last meeting the! lhaye approved the request 

for a mobile intercept operation by the Air Force. Thus there is at the 

moment no basis for anticipating so definitea ·.re .. ·. f· .. .. u·.· ... • .... ~1 of the facilities 

request that one can recommend either an approach\ t.. I or a 

En.closure with USCIB 9.2/9 dtd S Nov 54. 

EO 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

i.,.,O:P SEORBT 
• REF ID:A5811 • 

TOP SECRET 

reversal of US policy. If the I I iater refuse a quid pro quo 

limited to cash, and do so after strong representations as to the reasonableness of the US position, there will\then be a basis for considering 

use of massive pressure. 

Th "tuation appears to be true of recent relations 

with th or anization. Des.pi te the previous history of 

close bargaining the apparently have adopted the US suggestion for 

intercept operations o without making large demands. This, together 

with the reported wi . i.ngness to provide the US with all their raw 

intercept, suggests thnt here alsp matters are not at such an impasse as 

to require action by thE: Special Committee and by the NSC. 

'With respect to the statement onra1.ds the Department of State member 

believes that 6b is actually a USCIB statement of an urgent intelligence 

requirement. If this is the case, it is suggested tha·t the require:mi:int 

::Jhould be submitted to the appropriate.military authority rather than to 

the Special Committee. If the military.authority ~-s in doubt as to 

national policy it should place the matter\before\the NSC. 

In ad.di tion to the above points there a.l'e>.··.in··· .. drcati ans +.bat. JI! basic 

realignment in the relationship between the US and_ I is 

under consideration. This, together with the progress which can/and is 

being made through other channels, suggests that the \draft memorandum 

should not be forwarded to the Special Committee. ··· 

EO 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

w. Park Armstrong, Jr. 

TOPSBCREf'