https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/2ba1cdd9ea249606a2bde85ecc4138d7.pdf fa1768f52616f326e6f18b4baf6a5db2 PDF Text Text Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur Tacces a Tinformation J> D E P A R T M E N T OF E X T E R N A L AFFAIRS- Jx 7 y Subject Date June....?!,... 1.9.69 Publication MPs expected to oppose plan for warning net vi- ..,.,:. r2 / _ ^..SiSfeSJLlML ARWS CONTROL Ai4D DiSARM. says there is no need to adopt a position ,at present because OTTAWA — The Commons the ABM plan still must win Committee on External Af- • approval in Congress. Testifairs and National Defense mony submitted at committee will probably recommend this sessions indicates that, in week against Canadian en- any case, operation of the dorsement at this time of the ABM system would not pose a Airborne Warning- and Control real fallout danger to Canada System (AWACS) proposed by in the sense described by its critics, the report says. the United States. The committee endorses the The committee will urge that in any future 'Surveillance NORAD concept of a defense system operating under the against manned bombers as a North American Air Defense viable part of the protection nuclear Command agreement, 'com- screen for the U.S. s mand of Canadian air space deterrent. But the report apshould be kept in Canadian parently recommends that funds allocated in this area hands. reaJ The committee's recommenNORAD — Page 2 dations are contained in a re-, port to be tabled in the Com* From Page One ther Government after such mons tomorrow. review with a notice of one AWACS is part of a new should be restricted to. financ- year. $12.3-billion defense system' ing of ground installations, Canada's - role in 'North proposed by the United States. such as those already in place American defense after expiry The plan includes deployment on the DEW and Pinetree of the current NORAD pact in of new interceptors, over-the: lines. 1973 is under study, as part of horizon radar for missile as 1 Proposals of the committe, the Government's review of well as bomber surveillance, headed by Ian Wahn (L, St. foreign and defense policy. and the supplementary air-, Paul's) will be contained in a • Defense Minister Leo Cadborne warning system. Cost of >.majority report. New Demo- ieux, in his statement to the the package is spread over a j • cratic Party members of the Commons on Monday on 10-year period. committee will file a minority planned reductions in Canada's over-all armed forces The report, second to be! report. produced by the committee at '• The NDP, which since 1967 strength, indicated Air Dethis session, will likely ex-' has been urging that Canada fense Command would'remain press dissatisfaction .with the get out of NORAD, will proba- much as it is for the immediBut he said decilimited degree and nature of, bly recommend that Ottawa ate future. must be made on the Canadian involvement in the press Washington to 'abandon sions post-1975 bomber defense syspresent NORAD set-up. But j the ABM plan. tem, including the proposed the committee suggests it ! The NDP also is at odds AWACS, over - the - horizon would not be feasible techni- with the committee majority radar and new jet intercepcally or economically to re- on the. issue of a Soviet tors. cast this system at present. bomber threat to North AmerCanada's contribution to the The committee report criti- ica. The NDP minority statecizes current NORAD cost- ment will question the credi- various systems set up under sharing arrangements be- bility of such a threat in the NORAD had been of the order tween Canada and the United era of intercontinental'ballis- of 8 to 10 per cent of the total States because of a lack of an • tic missiles. The minority re- cost. On each occasion the accepted standard. port will note the vulnerability percentage has '.'been- negoOn the U.S. Government's' to attack of Canada's present tiated. If this rough percentage .proposed Anti-Ballistic Missile contribution to NORAD—three Isystem, the committee report: squadrons of CF-101 Voodoos guide was used in the case of and two squadrons of Bomarc the $12.3-billion new surveilB missiles—and suggest that lance system envisaged in ! Canada cannot afford to be AWACS, Canada would be plunged into similar expendi- contributing more than $1.2f ture on such vulnerable items. billion in a 10-year period. The Commons defense com- I In March of last year, Can- mittee report will likely urge ada and the United States re- that any future surveillance . newed the NORAD agreement systems such as AWACS, the for another five years. percentage contributed by The renegotiated agreement Canada should be cut, in view may be reviewed at any time of the fact that this country in that five-year span at the provides the air and ground request of either Government, space to make operation of and may be terminated by ei- such systems possible. By MURRAY GOLDBLATT Globe ani Mail Reporter L z AWACS, desigsed to provide ' better protection against a first-strike threat by manned bombers, would replace al- most all land-based- radar warning systems by about 1975. ' • Present systems do not adequately detect 1 o'w.-f 1 y-i n g bombers,' which would be able to come within 200 to 300 miles of potential target areas and launch air-to-ground mis-, sites,, according to defense experts. Under the airborne warning system,.' planes, loaded with, electronic gear would be continually aloft to alert ground stations and jet interceptors to any bomber^hreat. The report of the Commons Defense -Committee accepts the validity of the arguments for an anti-bomber defence, taking the position that such a system will force enemy bombers into retaliatory roles. According to such arguments, junking of. the bomber defense system would.permit bombers to play a ifrst-strike nuclear attack role—either separate from an assault by ICBMs or coupled with such an assault. . 000129 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur l^gn^sgTinj'amotion a % DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFF^ r-,s\SP^i Subject. Date > i . <£->•-> / JUN 15 1969 Publication.. NEW YORK TIMES Tlpe ArmsElebate: Is Democracy the Foe of Clarity? earnest argument about The indications are that the That is why laymen are goon eadly and costly arms race Nixon Administration, like Con- left hopelessly confused and WASHINGTON, June 25—The and ftow best to stay ahead of gress, is divided in this debate why a dispassionate and nontalk about nuclear weapons the Russians while also trying between those who see security political man like Riehard policy inside the National Secu- to join wlto them to stop it. in the fastest possible develop- Helms is being torn limb from rity Council last week and again today may be quite di- Give or lake a few votes, ment of new weapons to keep limb by the protagonists as they rect and rational, but the public the Senate is about evenly ahead of the Russians and those try to claim the Director of Cendebate here over arms control divided on the inerits of Presi- who would hold down the pace tral Intelligence for their side of is fast sinking into a semantic dent Nixon's proposal to begin long enough to test the Rus- the argument. swamp. There may toe no bet- deployment of anVmti-missile sions in negotiations. A Chiding Reported ter way to design a m'ssile defense system. Besides the strategy than by value of this new weaoon, the Who stands precisely where Mr. Laird insisted that Mr. the vote of a ma- arguments turn on theVonse- in this debate is not always Helms appear with him before Analysis jority, but officials quences for the arms rack and clear. But there is no doubt Senator J. W. Fulbright's ForNews and Congressmen for the rival claims of those that Defense Secretary Melvin eign Relations Committee yeson all sides are be- who wish to invest much mo! R. Laird is giving aggressive terday with the predictable reto the campaign for suit that each side claimed his ginning to wonder heavily in domestic social pro 1leadership 1 ore aind bigger weapons and every phrase. This evening, whether democracy really has grams. to become the enemy of clarity. Then come the MIRV's and that this represents a major there were unconfirmed reAfter dozens of hearings and MRVs. MIRV's are multiple, change of emphasis at the Pen- portsports here that Mr. Nixon had chided Mr. Helms for his explanations, the. confus'-on is independently targetable re- tagon now genuinely nonpartisan. entry vehicles, or separately FrinnW Secretary Robert S. deportment in the debate. The doves in these matters aimed bombs packed into a McNamarsa proceeded on the The Administration remains argue that our MIRV's are bet- single missile, now being tested theory, a?uhe recently'put it committed to moving into arms ter than their MRV's and the by the United States. MRV's once again^Vthat "no. amount control talks with the Soviet hawks argue that their MRV's are the Soviet variant—without of military Btodware can buy| Union later this summer and leave footprints so menacingly an I.because they cannot be us security atuMhat's a fact we Mr. Nixon will preside at the similar to our MIRV's that we individually aimed, but said to have yet to lifmti" He was second meeting of his National obviously need arms. More- be falling in just the right prepared to let ^tfie Russians Security Council on the sub< over, say the hard-Mners, we patterns to threaten a cluster gain a sense of equality in the ject tomorrow. need superiority to enjoy suffi- of our underground missiles. arms race in the\desperate Mr. Laird supports that efciency in nuclear missiles as we The MIRV debate derives hope that they wduld then fort, though he is not happy move into arms control talks. directly from the debate over agree to slow it down\jr stop about freezing weapons develTo which the soft-liners reply the antiballistic-missile system altogether opment while the nation no that the talks can never succeed because MIRV's have the effect Mr. Laird, however, Insists longer enjoys the superiority he unless sufficiency is defined as of turning an arsenal of nuclear that the country cannot afford thinks it enjoyed five years ago. virtual'parity. shotguns into an arsenal- of a moment's delay or it Vill Other high officials, who feel Whereupon one group is de- nuclear machine guns. They wake up in five or six ye compelled to express themselves privately, share the feelnounced as a bunch of missile- are deemed to be essential to from now. not only with rattpig captives of the mili- penetrate the other fellow's smaller nuclear arsenal bul ing of Congressional critics that taryMndustrial complex and the ABM's, just as ABM's are also one that might be vulner- " e quest'for superiority is fuothw as a herd of isolationist deemed to be essential to de- able to a surprise attack. Ap- tife but that the uncoordinated fend against MIRV's and MRVs. parently, President Nixon agrees policies of Moscow and Washunilateral disarmers. with him, or at least favors ington are'making it inevitable so will.the clerk please call The Chicken and the Egg ; this kind of talk to help get nonetheless. " the roll? the ABM. program under way. Figuring out whichcame As rbur the President,' he has There is, beneath all this, a first, and which ought to be Although everyone in the desaid hewants both arms constopped first, is not unlike bate claims to be speaking from trol and vnore weapons, thus the proverbial chicken-and-the- the same "facts" and intelli- "keeping His options openT and egg problem. The only certain gence reports, the. crucial is keeping his\ltimate preference testimony so far is that if the sues turn on highly specula to himself. EVen up closf and cycle is not broken soon, the tive estimates of Soviet inten- after all the debate, therefore, weapons of both great powers tions and on disputed technical reading gto'n's ifntenwill surely proliferate into a testimonials to the new weap tions is proving toJoe no easier costly new "generation." ons. than reading Moscaw's. ly MAX FRANKEL Special to Tht New yorlc Timet ARMS CONTROL AND DiSARM. 000128 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context CDBM00277 Title A name given to the resource Transcript from Globe and Mail Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 6/25/1969 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG25-A-3-c, file 27-11-7, "DEFENCE - CONVENTIONAL AND NUCLEAR ARMAMENTS - ANTI - BALLISTIC MISSILES (ABM) = DEFENSE - ARMEMENTS DE TYPE CLASSIQUE ET NUCLEAIRE - ENGINS ANTIMISSILES (ABM)," vol. 10357, part 6, Library and Archives Canada, (LAC). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource External Affairs Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Canadian Crown Subject The topic of the resource Anti-ballistic missiles Description An account of the resource MPs Expected to Oppose Plan for Warning Net Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Canada Declassified Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Language A language of the resource en