https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/d1051f1a5ef00351c75d34024b37e8fc.pdf 4dc5bddb593078cefa236b1200a942c3 PDF Text Text Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur Tacces a Tinformatio **v % DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIR: T Subject Date $£.....£?. JulZ...lQ.,..1969 us ,'Tells Senate Russians Are| j'Dangerous, Unpredictable.' With Growing Strength By JOHN W. FINNEY Special toTlw New York Times WASHINGTON, July 9—j •Senator Henry M. Jackson led off the case for the Admih^ isstration's Safeguard missile defense system today by arguing "that the Soviet Union was "a dangerous, unpredictable opponent" with a "fast growing" military capability. - In the face of such a Soviet threat, the Washington Democrat said in a Senate speech, the only "solid and prudent" course for the United States is to take steps to defend its nuclear retaliatory forces. As the Senate' settled down for a protracted deate, Senator Jackson, a senior member of both the Armed Services and Atomic Energy. Committees, was the first Senator to present a detailed case for deployment of "the Safeguard antiballistic-, missile (ABM) system. . . On behal of the opposition, [Senator John Sherman Cooper, Republican of Kentucky, and Senator Philip A. Hart, Democrat of Michigan, introduced an [amendment to the military [authorization bill under debate. -The amendment would preclude the use of any of the Safeguard [funds for deployment of a 'missile defense system. Closed Session Put Off Senator John C. Stennis of [Mississippi, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, was thwarted once again in his desire to have a secret session of the Senate, but it was agreed that such a closed session would be held later, with all aides excluded from me chamber. a 7~//-7' I / Publication ^J™..1^..^™S.. " W e j a v e a hard enough time-keeping our ov»?F-mmrrfis closed," said the Senate majority leader, Mike Mansfield, in explaining the move to restrict the session to Senators only. Senator Stennis has wanted the closed session to discuss intelligence 8nformation about the Soviet military threat «L„ Senator Jackson in his speech ^^drft&i-Sr^e^Uniont'as a dangerous^npredlctableiop-' ponent-i-onHheVer'ge of a leadership crisis,, the coutcome of (Whichi cannot be forecast." •. Meets With Mclntyre "Vithis perspective," he said, ;?'the fast-growing military capabilities of the Soviet Union Itake on added significance... we do not know who will have the finger of the Soviet trigger in the months and years ahead. The enormous Russian arsenal will be at the' disposal of whatever 'strong man' or ascendant faction-of tough, ambitious figures comes to the fore in the Soviet power struggle.'.' ^ •.' The ABM opposition, however, was not so much inter tested in the Jackson speech as in what he was telling Senator Thomas J. Mclntyre, Democrat , of New Hampshire, iri repeated hSddles off the Senate floor, ffhe Jackson-Mclntyre mei I'infl gave rise to thoughts .amo Continued on Page 16, Column .—\ 000112 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur Tacces a Tinformatio DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS Subject Date xizlhJ ABM's -I- July... 10,... 19.69 Publication . I !^...i^...I , ?f^.... Times f Congress Group Hopes to Use \ ABM Fight to Curb Other A rins By NEIL SHEEHAN Special l o The New York Times \ WASHINGTON, July 9—An by 200,000 men, mainly by unofficial bipartisan Senate- withdrawing most of the 320,000 American troops in Europe, House group made public today could bring another saving of a report seeking to carry the at least $1.2-billion. momentum of the antiballistic The report is the first fruit missile debate into a much of an effort by a growing segbroader attack on military ment of. Congress to bypass the traditional Armed Services spending. The report, prepared by the Committee and find independMilitary Spending Committee ent and effective means to of the Members of Congress for make major slashes in military Peace Through Law, provides spending. The group's objective a critical analysis and data for is to channel these funds into an assault on six other major such domestic problems as education and polluweapons programs besides the poverty, ABM, including the Adminis- tion. tration's proposal to build a While the public endorsers new manned nuclear bomber of the report included only one at an estimated cost of $12- Senator with major influence, J. W. Fulbright of Arkansas, billipn. The committee is an unoffi- the chairman of the, Foreign Committee, Senator cial 80-member Senate-House Relations and his colleagues organization that seeks to pro- Hatfield been quietly encouraged mote international cooperation have and aided by other powerful and disarmament. Senators, including the maNot all its members support jority leader, Mike Mansfield the report, but„the recommen- of Montana; Senator John dations have so far received Sherman Cooper, Republican of the endorsement of 13 Sena- Kentucky, and Senator Edward tors and 35 Representatives M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, within and Outside the com- the assistant Democratic leader. mittee. success of the group in Senator Mark O. Hatfield, The current session will depend Democrat of Oregon who is the the heavily on the outcome of the chairman of the committee, es- Senate vote on the ABM, extimated ..that the report's pro- pected later this month. posals would"* reduce the Ad- But even if the Administraministration's $7?-billion de- tion wins on the issue, the type fense budget request for-the of-strategy represented by^the fiscal year 1970 by $1.5-billion report will bear fruit in future beyond the $2-billion already years, in the view of its jjehcut by the Senate Armed Serv-. dorsers. I ices Committee. In deference to congressional Over the next five years,.he protocol, Senator Hatfield caresaid at a news conference in fully - noted • today that the the Capitol, the recommenda- report was not designed to bytions could bring savings of up pass the authority of the Armed to $30-billion. Services Committee to scrutinize Reduction Differ the military budget but that it A comparison of the report's merely sought'"to supplement'" recommendations' with the the panel's work. Senate committee action Endorsers privately concede showed that th ereduction for that it does bypass the committhe current fiscal year of 1970' tee structure by its independent would be closer to $l-bilIion. analysis. Senator Hatfield called A separate proposal in the the document "a working paper report for - a reduction i n ,the|.6n- which we can initiate 3.5 million man armed 'forces responsible, rational debate." 000113 �XRtSr' ^-0X'%r\i, DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFA subject £.Am Date July... 1 0 , I.965. KS Publication Exeerpts From MajOT The..JN[ ork^TimeS Reports by Seriate Committee on Safeguard increase in Soviet SS-9 missuccessfully together in that Special to The NEW York T'.mM • based on a substantial mix- 5 almost instantaneous man- • sile production would eliminWASHINGTON, July . 7—• ture of vehicles of several \ ate any significant protecner which would be necesquite, different types—rriin- | Following are excerpts from tion by this system even if sary in case of sudden atthe report issued today by •uteman, bombers, and Po- i tack; and there is even more 'it worked perfectly. the Senate Armed Services laris/Poseidon — with each | In this connection, one of reason to doubt 'that the system having its own kind i Committee, setting forth mathe universally respected excomputer, which has been jority and minority views on of protection. Each system | neither built ncr tested, and p e r t s in this field, Dr. Wolfdeploying the Safeguard anti* has different limitations, is | which is admittedly far more jgang Panofsky, in an address , subject to varied uncertain| •ballistic missile system: last month stated: ties and requires distinct | complicated than any com' "If. the threat to Minutemodes of attack. Each type { puter ever yet attempted, Majority Views man grows at the rate projmust be protected, so as to \ will operate properly when Following are the considected by the Defense Deinsure nd easy defeat of our § called upon to do -so. partment, and if Minuteman erations which lead the masystem by an enemy. It must J became vulnerable at a cerjority of the committee to be of serious concern there- i Not Tested as a Whole tain time several years hence, support the Safeguard anti- fore if any part of our de- : Finally, it is logical to conthen if the Safeguard system ballistic missile system as terrent mixture is adversely sider whether, even if these wereinstalled and if it funcproposed for authorization in affected by changing adverse ; three separate components tioned' ' perfectly; then the forces and technologies. ~ .! fiscal year 1970. would operate " properly . as Minuteman would be just as We have solid hard intelliseparate units, would they vulnerable as before only a [1] ' gence information that— The New Ynrk 1 i *s so operate when combined; few months later." On the eve of what is Senator John C. Stennis Senator Stuart Symington (1) The Soviet Union has For obvious reasons,-the test- • ' ' • Presidents Praised hoped will be meaningful either in operation or under , ing . of any joint operation discussions with Soviet, RusDuring the' past 11 years, at least 230 • phase 1 program or the ini-, John--Stennis of Mississippi, .. has not been possible. sia on the' limitations of stra- construction.although there has been SS-9 ICBM's. If the Soviets ; tiation and completition of the chairman, Richard B. - The second reason is the nothing tegic arms, the President of comparable" to what the United States will be in a "continue,; to build additional * the lO^site phase 2. _'Each Russell of Georgia, Henry M. vulnerability of the. system. is going . on today, there t missiles at the same rate as year the Congress will have Jackson of Washington, Sam stronger position with the apthe resistance nevertheless was tremendous in the past several years, by the opportunity to review J. Ervin Jr< of North Caro- Because proval of partial funding of strength (PSI) of the MSR pressure |rbm the Defense the mid-1970's they will be the phase I deployment as in a position to threaten the intelligence data and the lina, Howard W. Cannon of radar is less than 10 per cent .Department,arid some people the bill provides rather than effectiveness of our' Minute- - threat | to our forces. After Nevada and Harry F. Byrd Jr. of the strength of the missile • in . industry .to install the just to continue the program man forces. .Based on p a s t , such review the Corigress c a n ' . of Virginia, Democrats, plus. site in its present-conforma-. various ABM systems of the essentially in a research and accomplishments and their then be in a.position to assess ' .Strom' Thurmond of South tion, that radar is very vul- past; and it is now admitted 'Carolina, John G. Tower of development posture. nerable even to the less • that the wlfcdom of Presidents potential, it is assumed that , whether or hot under all the President Nixon has asked each missile will be able to circumstances the Safeguard - Texas, Peter H.. Dominick; of lethal, less accurate Soviet Eisenhower and Kennedy in Colorado arid Harry Gold- SS-11 missile, of which the refusing,to bow to those the Congress not to abandon contain three "separate war- system be continued. water of Arizona, Republi- Soviets have hundreds more pressures prevented this Govwork on the deployment of 16] heads; than they have SS-9's. an antiballistic missile sysThe significance of the ernment, from wasting many Threat, to Bombers Minority Views r tem but to proceed with it. leadtime element should be , Because the MSR radar is "billions of dollars. He said: *"*''";';;;, Seven members of the designed to guide both Safe(2) The Soviets are build- recognized. If the measured, Later the previously aban"I believe it is essential for ing a Polaris-type submarine progress proposed for fiscal •i Armed Services Committee guard missiles to their tar- doned elements: of the Nikeyear 1970 is not approved— voted against the authorizagets, if it is knocked out the Zeus and the Nike X systems the national security, and it that could in the iifhid-1970's Safeguard system were pooled together to form is essential to avoid putting threaten the system of that is, if production is tion of funds for the deploy-, entire delayed by 1 year—the initial ment of the Safeguard ABM would be blinded and there- . a "thin" city defense against B-52 bomber a n American President, either ground alert J operational capability now . •, '. system. fore worthless. this President: or,, the. next forces;band the Chinese. It was named Although we favor the President^in" the position • (3) Russia also has under;": scheduled for 1974 will be The third reason is the Sentinel. Still later, however, delayed for 2.years until 1976 program.of nucontinuation of research and relative ease by which the the , cities rebelled against where the ;,United ^States way a large v att,ack submarines', due to the loss of time caused development-on such a proj- Soviet Union could overcome this'untested system with'all would ;be second ^rather than ., clear by the breakdown in producect, after, listening to the any improvement in bur de- • the questionable premises' in the I970*s first,bor' at least £qual to, any' 5 which <JCOuJdbecome a'1 threat to pur Po- tion.momentum and the time testimony of vanous wit- fenses which could result b listed above. potential enemy." * A* laris/Poseidon: force." Obvi- consumed iri rebuilding pro- nesses called before the com- from -the deployment df Thereupon the name of the Coming Talks Cited ously'we cannot assume that duction lines. mittee, we have concluded Safeguard. As mentioned system was changed to SafeThe President believes that our Polaris system will be that the deployment of this previously, objective critics guard, and [7], its mission "the first-weapon in history the backing of- the Congress multibillion - dollar system predict that its unprecedentReputable scientists have would not add to the security edly complicated electronic changed fdm city defense to on .his. Safeguard program ' t o remain invulnerable. defense of missile sites. The hard truth is that by testified: that the system will ' of the'United States. would strengthen his hand in system may not function un- the f (In passing, it should be the forthcoming negotiations the mid-1970's unless we not operate effectively due to It was noticed that wit- der sudden attack (in which noted neither the longwith.the'-SoViet Union on the '- continue to make appropriate its' complexity while other sci- nesses .who testified for de- case, if this is the basket range .that Spartan nor the preslimitation,of offensive and y.r decisions to threats of our entists have testified that de- ployment of the system de- in which we have placed our ent MSR radar would have defensive "lnuclear systems,. Minuteman and bomber re-, spite the complex nature of voted much df not most of eggs, our security would be been designed' as they have If-we unilaterally abandon all taliatory force, and' to our. the Safeguard system, it can .their time to re-emphasizing involved). been if their original purpose -forces, the second- be anticipated that the tech- their fears of the Soviet deployment of .our ABM's, Polaris had been the defense of misLittle Protection Found what. Incentive do; we,give strike capability of a. large nical problems, can be re- Union; whereas witnesses sile sites.) ..' • proportion of pur strategic solved in order for the system the Soviets to negotiate with who opposed the proposed What we do"~assert, howMatter of Priorities us ,a limit or reduction in .': deterrent .forces : will be in to. become operationally ef- system expressed in detail ever, is that even if Safe* fective? •' their, ABMVS deployment .- if, - d o u b t s ' * • '••-. »' why they believed the systm guard Works perfectly as deIt;is our considered opinThe testing and design would not work, or why and American > negotiators .*are''-" It is against this-set o f signed, it will do practically ion that, except in one reconfronted - with a situation•*problemsb, that Congress' has . work ori, hoth the missile, the> how it could be nullified in nothing in protecting Minute-' spect, the situation which where the Soviet negotiators, been-'-asked to approve a •radar components; and the any real effectiveness by rel- man sites. was faced up to by Presibelieve time' is running on the modified antiballistic missile computers so far have not atively minor additions to dents Eisenhower and KenThe. magnitude of the asSoviet side, our negotiators /.- Safeguard-system which,, if indicated that there are insuthe Soviet SS-9 production, serted threat has been de- nedy is- the same situation would be- up against very ad- j-.funding is completed in later perable technological prob- .", -b In Fear for 25 Years classified, but the Defense We face today, as the Con•..years, is designed primarily: lems confronting the Safe- '-- The American people have Department verse odds. ,' •, has consistently gress "and the people weigh to . provide a protection for ' guard system. It is prudent , To , arrive at successful, lived with fears of a Soviet refused • to release classified • the merit of deploying this -the national command authat any doubt in this ques"reciprocal, and mutuallybac "attack for some quarter of a information presented . the proposed Safeguard system. cSgtiible'''!agreemen,t- inve.lv.- ^thorityfaftdwital'elements * of ^itiorib be resolvedJnifavor of — century, - ever. - since. ..-World,,- committee -which-to * us-pre- ; - - That -exception has >,to do •' ' ; . '.'OUT^bomber: and Minuteman, confidence in the system. ins both: offensive and_'de War II, and have expended a sents,conclusively that a small With our not unlimited re- sources. This problem is ,of growing seriousness. It is currently expressed in the credit crisis we are experiencing at home and the currency, problems we know we now have abroad. We now also know that because of our domestic problems and our foreign, commitments, we must establish some order of priorities with respect to the use, of our' resources. Another word for' priorities is values. The American people desire and demand: an adequate defense; but it would seem pertinent to recall . that whereas, this. Government is currently, requesting $44 for the education of each American boy and girl, at the same time they . are requesting $20,400 iri ^ammunition for each man we are fightirig against in Vietcong guerrillas. • < Other Nations Limited This problem of. increasingly limited resources is,' one ' which is .also present in other countries. It is another reason- for hope that we Vvill be 'able, finally, to start on the long-delayed discussions looking toward some meaningful form of arms control. In summary, despite the heavy demands by our limited resources—demands incident to poverty, health, education, and foreign cbm, mitments—if We believed UUlMultUtlUtiuiliMMMI that the Safeguard system would contribute in any substantial fashion to the security of the United States, we, ! would recommend its deployment: We do not so believe, however. We do believe that any primary defense against the thrfeat of a nuclear attack lied in our deterrent capacity. In this connection, we believothat with our Polaris fleet, ouc landbased. ICBMs, our strategic bombers, and the thousands of additional nuclear warheads we have at sea arid abroad, ifb^ye were attascked we could destroy the Soviet Union, some 50 times oyer. • Under these circumstances, as the number'of nations with ntuclear weapons continues to grow, it would be unfortunate indeed if an ABM deployment cm our part had a negative effect, on .arms control discussions.' It -would, also appear clear that, if we proceed "with this system, the Soviet [Union will respond by in- | (creasing its offensive strength •so, as to negate any possible •"advantage which might be. •derived from said Safeguard -deployment. The result.could J only be a further escalation } of. the arm's race, •.;,, I It is for these, reasons that j we oppose deployment of the ! Safeguard system at this tirn'e. ; 1 • ' STEPHEN M. YOUNG ' D A N I E L K. INOUYE :..•!..:.m 0::....-± 0.j^-^;<, —1H9 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur Tacces a Tinformation DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS Subject. 30-pX Date J.uiy_..Jja.f.....I96.SL' Publication Jl-H-1 The...Ga.ze,t.te. :|i* ••-' .--*. r. , AjLO DISARMT \"JX~I Opponents of ABMs^ pull ahead on Senate as new tactics tried WASHINGTON — (UPI-AP) — Senate Democratic leader ' Mike Mansffield said yesterday he believes foes are ahead in the senate fight on President Nixon's request for authorization to proceed with ah antiballistic missile. (ABM) system. Mansfield told reporters, however, the outcome remains Ui doubt. Two leading opponents served notice that they planned to introduce an amendment to ban use of funds for ABM deployment of a system, specifying any money provided could be used only for research and development. . The Senate, in its second Arguments for: Protects landday of consideration of a based offensive missiles, thus military procurement bill con- preserving them as a credible taining ABM requests called deterrent to a Soviet first off a planned secret session strike; puts United States in to discuss the question. position to. negotiate from Sen. John C. Stennis, <D— strength in formcoming arms Miss.) armed services com- control t a l k s with Soviet mittee chairman who is man- Union; enables United States aging the bill, says such. a to continue research for a session—rare for the Senate- better ABM while protecting ; is needed because of classified itself. •• information that may be dis- Arguments against:. System is cussed. so complicated there is strong Mansfield was asked what chance it won't work and can be expected to learn in an never be M y tested except in executive session that he did event of an attack; current not already know about the U.S. strategic force, including ABM. "Frankly, not a hell of ICBMs, bombers on air alert a lot," he replied. and Polaris submarines, is Meantime here is the what immune from destruction by a and the why of the Safeguard Soviet first-strike; cost is anti-ballistic missile situation: prohibitive and money could President Nixon's proposal: be better spent on domestic Deploy the Safeguard anti- social welfare projects; deballistic missile — ABM — cision to deploy could block system, formerly called Sen- chances lor successful arms tinel, at 12 sites in the United 'talks and spur new escalation States, each equipped with of arms race. . radars, computers and two kinds of anti-ballistic missiles. Purpose: To protect -four Outlook: House of RepresenM i mitemen intercontinental tatives expected to approve ballistic missile sites, seven Safeguard; Senate is almost Strategic Air Command bom- evenly divided,, but Demober bases and Washington, cratic leaders believe Nixon administration can win by a D.C. against missile attack. Initial recommendations: Two small margin with pressure. sites, at M a l m s t r o m Air Force Base, Great Falls. Mont., and Grand Forks Air Force Base. N.D.. to , be operative by 1973, plus acquisition of land for 10 additional sites, to be deployed by 1975. Cost: Official estimate- was $6,600,000,000. for the 12 sites. p l u s '$600,000,000 if two optional sites in Alaska and Hawaii are added. This does not include $1,200,000,000 for development of nuclear warheads. Critics say the Ml system will cost from $12,000,000,000 to $20,000,000,000. Key issue before Congress: Authorization of $891,500,000 to start the first two sites and acquire land for the 10 other sites. J 000116 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur Tacces a Tinformation » DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS Subject Date ABM Jy-ly...lO,... 1.9.6.9 ARMS CONTROL gjyjyj mQJX'X'IM. P u W / o M x J ^ ^ e . „ f e w . . Y p r k Times w^^ "Kennedy Says Pro-ABM Boole Is Aided by Pentagon that the book had been put to- essays had been written inde- study was awarded* the in-: quiry found. . . . . . | gether v/ith material developed pendently of this -work. "'.' WASHINGTON, July 7-Esena- independently of the secret He said that the Hudson In- Mr. Kahn said the book projtor Edward M. Kennedy charged ;tudy. , . stitute was receiving about 70 ect began about six weeks ago. / today that a'forthcoming, book Mr. Kennedy, a leading Sen- per cent of its yearly $1.2-mil- The first increment of the by members of the Hudson In- ate opponent of the ABM, spon- lion research work through classified ABM.study, $34,973 stitute defending the Nixon Ad- sored a book published last ministration's antiballistic mis- month by scientists, scholars Government contracts with the was awarded last March 27. . sile defense system "appears to and Johnson Administration of- Defense Department; the Stats •Senator-Kennedy said today be financed in part by the De- ficials opposed to the ballistic Department and other agencies. that the institute was thus alpartment of Defense." ; In the last ysar, he.said, the ready under contract to the . in a statement on the Senate missile defense. portion has gone as high as Army on missile defense when July 17 Publication ! floor, Mr. Kennedy said that Mr. Brennan "testified in favor the institute, a Government- The Hudson Insttiute book, 90 per cent of the institute's of the ABM beforejthe Senate budget. supported research organization entitled "Why ABM?" and deat Croton-on-Hudson, N. Y., signed as an answer to - the An independent inquiry dis- Foreign Relations Committee on received a $70,253 contract this Kennedy-sponsored book, is closed that about 75 per cent of March 28, 1969, ostensibly .-as year from the Army organiza- scheduled for publication July the institute's work was com- air independent expert." . ( b ^ tion responsible for developing 1.7, shortly before the ABM. is- ing solely from the Defense the ABM for a secret study of sue is expected to come to a Department. Pentagon officials the strategic implications'of the Senate vote. said that the institute, received system. The Army organization Mr. Kahn said that two of the $873,000 in research contracts is the Safeguard Systems Com institute's nuclear strategists between July 1, 1968, and the ,mand at Huntsville, Ala. contributed essays to the end of last March. ,y'.Herman Kahn, the nuclear who book, Donald G. Bren- Last June' 20 -the research physicist who is the institute's Hudson and William Schneider Jr., organization obtained $35,280 director; said in a telephone nan conversation that no conflict were currently working on the more in defense work when the 'of interest wa's> involved and secret study for the Army. • second increment of the $70,253 But he contended that their contract for the. secret ABM j. * By NEIL SHEEHAM ' •'• '-*' Special to The New York-Tim* 000117 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur Tacces a Tinformation DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS » Subject Date Q..UP..L : „' Yfi- -hsAbrm^b. Publication Th l.. NeW .. Y . 0 .^.... T .. ime . S . f ABM Foes Bar a Retreat \ On Eve of Senate Debate ARMS CQMf^Oi White House Shows No Sign of Backing '• Down as Showdown Is Forecast— Panel's Report Gives 2 Views By JOHN W. FINNEY Specitl to Th» New York Times ; WASHINGTON, July 7—On arguments for arid against Safethe eve of the Senate debate guard. • on the Administration's Safe- The stiffening attitude of the guard Antiballistic missile de- opposition^ to Safeguard was fense' system, the bipartisan summed,-tip by Senator Mike opposition 'assumed /today a Mansfield, the Senate Demono-compromise stance toward cratic leader, who commented: the White House. , -. "If they don't,.wariEan accomWith the Administration modation, we just;,will have to battle it out."', Senator' Johfl Text of Committee's report' Sherman- Cooper of Kentucky, will be found on Page 12. the Republican' leader of the opposition, seconded the Mans'TJ' \ showing no signs of beating a field view. ',retreat, the result waS to set •After weeks of dropping hints the stage for a showdown that it was willing to accept a fight between the White House compromise that .would- save forces and the Senate opposi- the Administration's face, the tion, with, the outcome, far opposition has concluded that there is no White House infrom certain. The Senate Armed Services terest in reaching an accomCommitte provided a backdrop modation ' that would avoid a for the fight today when it issued a report containing the Continued on Page 12, Column I Foes of ABM Bar Retreat on Eve of Senate Debaw Continued From Page 1, Col. 7 is so closely .divided that the requested $345.5-million. for Soviet Union and to protect outcome, as Senator Mansfield procurement of radars and com- the nation's nuclear deterrent knockdown fight in the Senate. put it, isva toss-up. The opposi- puters for the first two planned against a growing Soviet MisWhite House officials in re- tion, however, is reasonably cent days haye been suggesting confident that it can command Safeguard sites in North Dakota sile force. that the "Administration has a bare majority, an assessment and Montana. In addition, $400- Citing Mr. Nixon's statement prepared to accept some modifi- that has contributed to its new million is being requested for that the system was "essential cations, but hone that would view that the initiative for a research and development and for national security," the mago far enough to satisfy opposi- compromise must now come $12.7-million for 'construction unilaterally abandon all deploytion demands for a'decision from the White House. of Safeguard missile test facili- ment of our ABM's, what incenagainst deployment at this time ties on Kwajalein Island*Jn^the tive do 'we .give the Soviets Strategy. Session of the Safeguard system. Pacific. * •'._-. ,--•;_,..";: to negotiate with us a limit on Meanwhile,. however, the '. Opposition Senators met-this White House, according to Re- afternoon "for a final strategy ' The opposing argumeritsHhat a reduction in their ABM depublican Senators, has been session for the debate,-which is will be heard over, and over in ployment?" tomorrow or the forthcoming Senate debate preventing representatives of expected to open ? the opposition from1 seeing Wednesday'and probably con- were set forth today by a.divided. Senate Armed Services President-NiXQnrt-a policy that tinue through most of July. has only contributed to the Tentative agreement was re- Committee in. a report on a new adamant stand of the op- ported to have been reached on $20-billion military procurement an opposition amendment- that bill that contains authorizatiori position. The Senators who oppose :would preclude the use of any for initial deployment of the Safeguard deployrhent-' suspect funds for deployment but per- $10.8-billions Safeguard system J that the White House, in its mit the Army to continue with The committee majority no-compromise position, may research and development on argued that the system was necessary to strengthen the be misjudging its strength in "an antiballistic system. In the Administration bill bei President's hands in strategic ^the Senate. N^At this juncture the Senate fore the Senate, the Army has arms control talks with .the A3K. -. - J 000118 � 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 CDBM00285 Title A name given to the resource Transcript from NYT Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 7/10/1969 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 Jackson Asserts a Soviet Threat Makes ABM Vital 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