Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume II, Organization and Management of U.S. Foreign Policy, 1969–1972

62. Minutes of Washington Special Actions Group Meeting¹

Washington, July 11, 1969, 2:13–2:50 p.m.

WASHINGTON SPECIAL ACTIONS GROUP (WSAG) MEETING

SUBJECT

• Military Contingency Planning for Korea

PARTICIPATION

• Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman
• State—
• U. Alexis Johnson
• Winthrop Brown
• Defense—G. Warren Nutter
• CIA—Cord Meyer
• JCS—Vice Adm. Nels C. Johnson
• NSC Staff—
• Col. Alexander M. Haig
• John H. Holdridge
• Col. Robert M. Behr

Summary of Decisions

1. A Working Group under Ambassador Brown, responsive to the WSAG, will produce three sets of contingency plans for Korea. These plans will be structured in the form of sequences of events and will cover low, intermediate and high levels of military involvement.

2. A similar Working Group will be formed for Middle East plans.

3. The WSAG meeting time will be standardized at 2:00 P.M. on Fridays.

The meeting began at 2:13 P.M. Secretary Johnson suggested to the Chairman that he be permitted to report to the Group the results of a “rump meeting” between the two Johnsons which took place on July 10th. Kissinger yielded to Secretary Johnson who then discussed the State-Defense meeting of the previous day. Its purpose was to review the work done by the Joint Staff in grouping the various military plans into categories of response (called for at the last WSAG meeting), and to map a course of action which would distill from the NSSM 34 Study² and the DOD plans a paper having greater utility for decision-makers. Because much of the work on the probable nature of NK provocation has been done in the NSSM 34 Study, the follow-on effort should concentrate on building scenarios for various levels of military response without too much regard for how the particular contingency would arise. This work could be done by a Working Group under Ambassador Brown, with representation appointed by the WSAG principals.

Kissinger remarked that what the “rump session” had concluded was coincident with his own thoughts. He would not, therefore, have to take the time of the Group by critiquing the NSSM 34 Study (which he regards as an excellent foundation document) in order to express the same conclusions with respect to an approach to the problem of providing the President with useful options in the event of another Korean emergency.

Admiral Johnson clarified what he sees to be the working arrangement—a small ad hoc group responsible to the WSAG as opposed to a NSC/IG effort. All agreed.

Kissinger stated that the Working Group should not concern itself with recommendations about when and why a particular plan should be implemented. All that is called for is a set of options including at the one extreme “surgical strikes,” heavy military involvement at the other extreme, with in-between options such as attack against several airfields. Admiral Johnson noted that diplomatic maneuverings were, of course, related but a thing apart and not germane to the task at hand. Secretary Johnson remarked that the work on the scenarios would be eased by the nature of the problem itself. When a specific course of action is selected for development, that course then logically dictates what must be done to carry it out. He visualized the end-product as a sequence of events similar to that produced during the EC–121 incident.

Kissinger cautioned that a philosophical attachment to one class of response—be it minimum, intermediate, or maximum violence—often tends to cloud contingency plans. What we need are scenarios for the decision-makers. They will have to exercise their responsibility to choose the appropriate level of response from among a group of options. Returning to the plan of action, Secretary Johnson suggested a “plan a week” approach—for example, the next WSAG meeting should look at the “surgical” strike category, with the other options following at weekly intervals. Kissinger agreed and standardized future meeting times—Fridays at 2:00 P.M. There were no dissents.

Kissinger conjectured that if the President had, today, to select a response to a provocation similar to those of recent history, he would probably pick an intermediate option—say, [8 lines of source text not declassified] Admiral Johnson thought the attacks should be regarded as punitive, and that they would not result in permanent damage.

Kissinger inquired how an attack against the [4½ lines of source text not declassified] Secretary Johnson inquired about other “nerve-center” targets. Kissinger asked Cord Meyer to identify a number of these targets and to report them to the WSAG by 15 July. Meyer agreed to do so. Nutter brought up a point relating to international law, citing a body of opinion which holds that the target must somehow be related to the “crime.” In other words, if you get hit from an airfield, you have to attack an airfield in response. At this point Secretary Johnson asked what one is really after in striking [9 lines of source text not declassified]

Admiral Johnson raised the question of format, noting that the work his staff had done for him this past week was perhaps too detailed. The consensus of the Group was that the EC–121 sequence of events is a good model.

Admiral Johnson returned to Kissinger’s earlier evaluation of the NSSM 34 Study. He concurred in the evident merit of the work and hoped that the Korean Task Force would keep it up to date. All agreed that the NSSM 34 Study—and all other IG plans—should be periodically reviewed and made current.

Brown departed at this point after being informed that his WSAG Working Group would include Bill Nelson (CIA), Colonel Boylan (OSD), John Holdridge (NSC), with a Joint Staff member to be reported later.

Kissinger then asked about Middle East plans. Secretary Johnson reported that these plans are not in the same good state as the Korean study. He has told Roger Davies to get with other agency representatives and move! As he (Johnson) sees it the Middle East problem should be developed by starting from the circumstance of renewed Arab-Israeli hostilities, what we can do to deter Soviet involvement, and then try to decide what to do if they do become involved. With regard to how the problem should be managed, he suggested another small ad hoc group working under Davies and responsive to WSAG direction. Admiral Johnson said that the Joint Staff is presently engaged in a Middle East study. The work already done will be relevant and useful. Meyer noted the variety of ways in which the Soviets could become actively involved. Admiral Johnson agreed this was a problem and mentioned, additionally, the situation in which the Israelis threaten the UAR with missiles. Kissinger said that another group was dealing with the missile problem, primarily with its diplomatic aspects.

Secretary Johnson then mentioned some vexing operational problems that come to mind when one considers US military responses in the Middle East. Among these are overflight rights (Spain and Turkey) and the lack of bases available to the US. Admiral Johnson suggested this was a problem for State to solve. He then recounted our successful use of Athens International Airport during the June 67 war. (US aircraft staged out of Athens on “mercy missions”—parachute delivery of water into the Sinai.) Nutter questioned whether Ethiopia could be used, but all agreed its location was not sufficiently proximate to the probable area of operations.

Secretary Johnson said that Davies would present a progress report on Middle East studies at the next WSAG meeting. He stated further that he had instructed Mr. Springsteen to be prepared to brief on Berlin. All agreed, however, that Berlin could be put off until later. Secretary Johnson said work on Berlin would nevertheless proceed concentrating on specific military options. Kissinger broke in with a caution that the basic plans must be appraised. Do we really mean them? There followed a brief discussion among the Group on the implications of Gromyko’s recent statements on the willingness of the USSR to talk about Berlin. Careful analysis of his remarks is in order. Kissinger offered the suggestion that the Soviets may have rejected a Berlin confrontation as a direct implement, regarding the option as a tool to gain their objectives should a crisis develop in another area—such as the Cuban incident.

There was no further discussion. The meeting adjourned at 2:50 P.M.

1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, NSC Institutional Files (H-Files), Box H–114, WSAG Minutes, Originals, 1969 and 1970. Top Secret; Sensitive. Drafted by Behr, who forwarded the minutes to Kissinger under cover of a July 11 memorandum. (Ibid.) The meeting was the WSAG’s second and was held in the White House Situation Room.
2. NSSM 34, March 21, 1969, and the NSSM 34 Study are ibid., Box H–070, Washington Special Actions Group Meetings, 7/11/69 Korea.