APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS: MR. MCNAMARA AND MR. MCCONE
Originator: OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
To: SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Document date: 00/00/0000
Document type: PAPER-TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

## Page 1

JFK Assassination System

Identification Form

Agency Information

Date:

4/12/201

AGENCY: OSA

RECORD NUMBER :

198-10001-10011

RECORD SERIES: GENERAL COUNSEL'S FILES

AGENCY FILE NUMBER :

Document Information

ORIGINATOR: OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

FROM:

TO: SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

TITLE: APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS: MR. MCNAMARA AND MR. MCCONE

DATE: 00/00/0000

PAGES:

12

SUBJECTS :

CUBA; LATIN AMERICA; SECRETARY MCNAMARA;

DIRECTOR MCCONE

DOCUMENT TYPE: PAPER, TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

CLASSIFICATION: Top Secret

RESTRICTIONS:

1A

CURRENT STATUS :

Redact

DATE OF LAST REVIEW :

OPENING CRITERIA: UPON REVIEW BY APPROPRIATE AGENCIES

COMMENTS: BRIEFING PAPERS/NOTES PREPARED BY STAFF FOR SECRETARY MCNAMARA'S

TESTIMONY TO STENNIS COMMITTEE

v9.1

HH 56829

DocId:32423642

Page 1

---

## Page 2

SECRET

NOFORN

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

SUBJECT: Apparent Contradictions: Mr. McNamara versus Mr. McCone

In response to your request, attached are three separate papers

addressing the three apparent contradictions concerning FROd miesiles,

the "static situation," and submarine bases.

Each of these papers presents in sequence the relevant statements

or testimony with an indication of source, the facts pertinent to the

testimony as provided by DIA, and a brief conclusion. Some statements

by Mr. Hughes of DIA have been included since these statements are used

as e reference point in your subsequent statemente.

DocId: 32424689

Page

DocTA: 32423642

Page

2

2

---

## Page 3

SEGRET

APPARENT FROG MISSILE CONTRADICTION

STATEMENTS:

Ms MaNamars

Nr. Hughes:

(Briefing)

Ihts photograph wee taken of the LaBoca

Pier area (Mariel) on 27 Dee 62. Again our

atreraft are weeping back and forth and

obeerved this Soviet ship moving into the

harbor area from out in the ocean sector,

at that time, we aleo observed parked at

dockeide 10 probable frog missile trans-

porters along with their support equipment.

This ship pulled in, this equtiment was

apparently loaded, and moved away from the

LaBoca area. This le one of the firet

photograghs that we have flrming up at least

the fact that some of the Soviet tactical

rocket forces have deperted the leland.

(p: 34 - Spectat Cuba Briefing)

Nr.. McNamarad

Recently, our reconnaissance has

revealed that certain equlment of these

Soviet combat forcen, namely that associated

lth the tactical rocket units, has also

started to be moved out of the island back

to the Sovlet Unlon:

(p: 36 - Special Cube Ertefing),

Mr.. MeCone

Mr. Kendall:

Nir. McNamara said also, I belleve,

Mr. McCone, that the frog misalles were

being sent back to Russia: There has

been no previous mention by anyone that

any of these have been ahipped out. What

is your postion on this?

Mr. MaCone:

Some six weeks ago,: we noted that

ten or 12 frog missile luchers were on

the dock at Martel, I believe, and

presumably were loaded on a ship,

We

continued to carry the number of miesiles,

of frog: mistles, and launchers, in

Cube that I mentioned yesterday, which

the

range ie 24 to 32:

Mr. Cline:

That ls the nssiles themselves.

Mir. McCone:

Those are the missiles themselves.

Mr. Kendall:

Have you ever carried more then that

estimate?

Mx. McCone :

I do not bellere so, no:

(pi

93-Testimony before Stennis Committee)

HH 5682355

DocId: 32424689

DocId: 32423642

Page 3

Page

3

---

## Page 4

SECRET, NOFORN

John Scall, ABC:

Mi. Secretary, you said that certain

equipment associated with the remaining

Soviet forces has started to move out.

Can you give us some details on that and

what you think it means?

Mx..

McNamara:

Yes, I don't wish to over-emphasize

this point, I don't wish to mislead you

into thinking that there are clear indica-

tions that the four Soviet combat forces

which I described as having on the order

of 1, 200 men apiece, roughly 5, 000 in total,

are at the present time moving out of Cuba.

But it is a fact that certain of the equip-

ment formerly assigned to those forces,

specifically certain of the rocket equipment

has been moved out of Cuba, What this

Implies for the future, I can't state.

(p. 39, Spectal Cuba Belefing)

FACTS:

On 6 November 1962 low-level photography revealed five probable frog missile

transportere and two probable frog missile launchere at the Remedios Military Camp.

On 9 November 1962, a sixth probable transporter was sighted. Based on these figures.

plus the esdstence of four such major Soviet military campe, it was estimated that

from 24 to 32 frog missiles were probably in Cuba (assuming 3 or 4 missiles per

launcher). Subsequent analysis of all photography to date falls to reveal any

SECRET NOFORN

i g,

5682355000873242164589

Page 4

Page

4

---

## Page 5

definitive count of frog miasilos in Cuba or any indication of outshipment of

frog ralesiles, Thorefore, the ebtimate of between 24 and 32 frog miasiles

in Gaba romnina the beat figure. It should be noted that this la an entimato

not a count.

The estimate is baned upon what was seen by photography coupled

with knowledge of Soviet organiaation and practice.

On 28 Fecember 1962 high-level photography revealed ten probable frog

misalle transporters on the dock at Mariel, No frog rolesiles or frog misaile

launchere were detected. A Soviet merchant ship was simultaneously photo-

graphed approaching the dock at Mariel on which these transporters were

dotected. Photography on 29 December 1962 revealed no frog missile trans

porteze or associated equipment on the dock at marie. but the merchant ahip

bad not departed. Whether the tronoportere weze loaded aboard thie vessel

and placed is the hold or whether the merchant vessel unloaded additiona.

frog missiles which were transposted by the ten tranaportera to forge other

location in Cuba, we do not know. The presumption by ClA and the Watch

Committee was that the transporters were loaded aboard the sbip

Based

upon arrangement of tranoportero.)

CONGLUSIONS:

The estimate of 24 to 32 frog missilee was made on 9 November 1982 and

zemains unchanges.

Mr. Kendell xefers to Frog Migriles being shipped out, Mr. McCone refers

to Erod Miselle Launchere presumably loaded on a ship. and Mr. McNamara refers

to Equipment Asociated with Tactical Bocket Unita started to bermoved out. GIA

and the Watch Committee prenumo that the forg Missile Traneporters were loaded

aboard ship.

HH 56829

25355000079232321589

Page

Page

5

5

---

## Page 6

SECRCT

APPARENT STATIC SITUATION CONTRADICHION

SPAT EMINIS:

No. McNamara

Mis. Hughes:

Along with this equipment removed

from Cuba; ve estimated that 5,000 Soviet

soldiers and techniciana have also depart-

•ed the seland, Remaining in Cuba, there-

fore, ire the defensive weapons systems

shown here at their deployed locationa,

along with the approximately 17,000 Soviet

troope and techniolans:

(p. 32 - Spoctal Cube Brieting, 6 Pob 63)

Mx. McNamare:

In surmory, then, indies and gentle-

men; we have recorded the entry of Soviet

offensive weapons systens into Guba and ve

have reported the introduction into Cuba

of a subatantial quintity of Soviet military

perionnel and Soviet military equipment,

defencive ams. Soviet military personnel

on the toland, including tachnietend increased;

we belleve, to a total of approximately

2a,000 by roughly the lat of November:

That total, at Mr. Hughed reported to you;

Mc Cone

Mir.

Kendall:

Nz, Mollemara also indieated

that he considered tube to be a

lessening military threat since

military people and equtpment are

being moved out. I think thie 10 a

direct quote, "There appears to be

some contining moverent out." This

Is contrary to the information at least

I have.

My information le that after

the missiles and the II-28e were moved

out, with the reduction that you have

indicated to 5,000 personnel there has

only been a rotation of people home

and & continuing movement in of the

supplies and pare parte and bacip

armunition for such things as SA-?.

Will you corment on that?

Mir. McCone:

Xes, sir, we observed the withdrawel

of what appears to be about 5,000 men

at the time that the MREMs and the TRiMs

CRE

WW 56825355001d:3232364589

Page 6

Page

---

## Page 7

has been reduced by the Disem Barkatlon,

removal of about 5,000 men from Cuba and

thetr shipment to the Soviet Union, leaving

= total of about 17,000 Soviet milltary

personnel including technicians in Cubs

today:

(p: 35 ÷ Spectal Cuba Briefing, 6 Feb 63)

Question: (Untdontifted - Belleved to be

Ann Bordone, Northern Virginie Sun)

Mr. Secretary, I gather from what you

day that in recent weeke Cuba has become

less of a military threat to the United

States than it was at the time right after

crisis, after the niesiles and the

bombers vere removed, less of a threat in

the sense of, I think you said, 5,000

Russians had returned to the lomeland.

It is a lessening threat to the United

States, fron what I gather.

Secretary McNamaze:

Cuba ls a lessening military threat

to the extent that the military personnel

of the Soviet Union and their equipment are

being removed. As you point out, 5,000 Soviet

military personnel have moved out in the last

eight or nine weeks, and there appears to be

sone continuing movement out. What the future

holde, I cen't say.

1 5682955001132323242

DocId: 32424689

Page 7

Page

7

Ont

and the bombers were removed. It 1e

assumed that this personnel are the ones

that were in chorge of these units and

responetble for them, and aleo possible

some collateral support and security

forces in connection with those particular

weapons systems,

The removal of the troops occurred

almost concurrently with the removal

of the equipment.

Now, since then we have observed

what ve feel 1o a relatively static

situation with, as I said yesterday,

with some rotation. We are continually

getting intercepts, one as recently

as yesterday, speaking of going hone,

but ve interpret this from our observa-

tion es rotational rather than a

withdrawal.

Senator Stents:

If counsel would yield just there;

Mr. McNemara, that very point there,

about the Beretary saying 1t was a

lessening, here are his exact vords no

quoted here in the morning paper,

lessening military threat."

We have a

rule in the courtroom that we won't

---

## Page 8

validity of another witness! testimony,

that te for the judge of the jury to

decide, and particularly we wouldn't

wan't you to have to pais on Mr McNanara's

testimony.

But how could there be such

difference in your testimony? Do you

have access to the samo facte?

Mix: McCone i

Yes,

Senator Stennte:

Yourself?

Mr. McCone i

tes, we have secess to the same

facts.

It is a matter of Judgement.

Senator. Stennia:

A natter of judgement only?

Mr: McGoned

I have expressed by views and I

think, Mr. Chatman, you will have to

ask Mc. MaNamars how he reached bis

conclusions.

Senator Stennis:

It is highly commendable that you

did and I was avoiding any personal

conflict between you.

IN 46829 DocK: 32423612

232458°Page

Page 8

8

---

## Page 9

Mr. McCone :

None what so ever.

Senstor Stennis:

I say I was avolding the interference

in the record or even in the Committee

but this 1s a mitter of judgement and

you certainly don't see any lessening of

the military strength after the with-

araval of the 5,000.

• 93-95, Testimony Stennis Comittee)

TAGES:

since the departure of the last contingent of the IL-28 bombers and the personnel

accomponying them, we have observed no significent change in Soviet military forces in

Cuba. There have been sone small shipments of military-associated transport and a

number of large crates which could contain additional constel defense cruise misalles

arriving in Cuba,

However, there have been no major changes in the personnel

pituation. Mr. MoConels statenent that;

"We are continually getting intercepts, one

as recently as yesterdav, speaking of going home, but ve interpret this from our

observation as rotational rather than a withdraval, " 1a contired es essentlally the

Interpretation of the Intelligence community. On thie basis we would consider the

present situation as one of neither build-up nor reduction but rather statie.

Regarding Mr. McNamera'a statement concerning;

"A lessening military threat,"

from the standpoint of offensive capabilities against the United States a currently

known and estimated by the Intelligence coumunity, this vould be a correct statement,

with the removal of the offensive MRiMs and the Il-28 bombere, the military threat of

Cuba vio-a-vis the United States in led then it wae prior to thie action on the part

of the soviet Union. However, there Lone

1 despitive evidence to show that this is

---

## Page 10

UNLI

e continuing movement but rather that it has been completed.

CONCLUSIONS:

The statement concerning "A lessening military threat" in the context of

offensive capabilities against the United States as currently inown and estimated

16 a correct statemert, (Lees than prior to the removal of the MiMe and IL-28

bombere. )

There is no definitive evidence to sbow that this is a contiming novement

but rather that the movement has been completed.

I 5682355

DocId: 32424689

DooId: 32423642

Page

10

Page

10

---

## Page 11

LYSECRET,

APPARENT

SUBMARINE BASE CONTRADICIION

SILAIN

• McNamaza

Question: (Unidentified Source)

Mr, Secretary, are there any sea-based

offensive weapons of the Polaria type or

othere operating in and around Cuba?

Secretary McNamara:

No, and I think perbaps what you have in

mind is that there are recurring more that

"the Soviets have established aubmarine bases

'on, the shores of Cuba, bases which might pre-

sunably be used for submarines carrying

mostles. We have no evidence whatsoever

that such bases have been established.

a mtter of fect, we have positive evidence

that they have not been.

(p. il - Special Cuba Briefing, 6 Feb 63)

DAN

OLENCT

Ms: McCone

Vor, MeCone:

He now of no submarines in the

vielbity of Cuba et the present time,

In October there were four submarineg

that ve had under surveillance that

were west of the Azords, and & mother

ship in the vicinity of the Azores

nich va likevise had under surveillance.

They are building a herbor under

the cover of a flohing trawler harbor.

I have no doubt but what they will

install in Cuba facilities for the

maintenance of submarines.

The soviet nuclear submarine fleet

and its missile launching fleet is

growing, as you know, and it would be

very convenient for them to have a

place to operate out of.

The Soviet conmnications link

between Moscow and the Havana consists

of two linke which have been installed

since the a0th of October. One

appears to support the Soviet Navel

operations and the other links the

Soviet minister of defense with

HW

55355

DocId: 32424689

Page 11

HH 56829

DooId: 32423642

Page

11

---

## Page 12

SECRE

ONET

the cormander of the Soviet forces

in Cuba.

These are very ominous, and important

developments, in my opinion.

(From the Inclosure to Memorandum to

the President from Mr. Mcdone dtd

7 Feb 63 which llete Mr. MeCone's

mublic and private statémenta.)

Mr. Kendal1:

Now, on the question of submarine

bese capability in Cuba, Mr. McNamaro

vas quite emphatic that there was none

end, as I recall, it wes your judgement

that the developments of such bases

was oither in being or very probably

for the future.

Can you verify your poattion on that?

Ms. McCone:

Yes, I think my position was that

there appeare to be under construction

a marine base the announced purpose of

which was to service fishing trawlers and

sindlar ships but I had no doubt but

what it would and could serve as a sub-

marine servicing base; that the existence

of such a base would be highly desirable.

However, we cannot say absolutely

that that particular base is to be a

HH 36829 DocTa: 32123612

32424689

Page

Pe l212

---

## Page 13

ubmarine base.

(D.: 101 - Testimony Stepais Committee)

FACTS:

The joint Moncow-lavana announcement of the signing of an agreement to construct

"a fishing port" copable of handling a large number of fishing trawlers and the

facilities for processing the catch caused considerable amprebension and speculation

within the intelligence commnity as to the real purpose of thie port. It wan

speculated thet such a facility could be used as a bone for servicing Soviet submarines

at see; to have no evidence thet this is the intended purpose of the fishing port.

Mr. NeConed itatement that, "there appears to be under construction a marine base,"

is an unfortunate choice of words in that ow information indicates that construction

is due to begin in Februray 1963 and therefore the base could at best be onty in

the

inittel stages of conctruction. We have no evidence that work has actually started

on this construction. At the present time we are unable to deterine whether or not

the flohing port could be used as a submarine bage. At the request of DIA the Navy

has undertaken & study to determine the suitability for using this fishing port or

any other facility in Cube as a submarine base. This study should be completed

within the next week;

CONCLUSION:

There 1o no evidence that construction has started.

There ie no evidence that the fiahing port will be used ad a submarine base:

We have not been able to detemine whether tha fishing port site could be used

as & submarine base. (Study has been undertaken. )

SECRET

ww 5662355

DoCIS:5632174289

Page 13

13

---