Office of the Historian

401. Memorandum From John Hedley of the Office of the Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency to Jeanne Davis of the National Security Council Staff1 2

Washington, June 29, 1971.

SUBJECT:

  • NSSM 125, “U.S. Oceans Policy”

REFERENCE: NSC Memorandum of 29 June 1971

1.
The Central Intelligence Agency has reviewed the study on U.S. Oceans Policy prepared by an Inter-departmental Ad Hoc Group in response to NSSM 125. We have no problems with it from an intelligence standpoint, and consider it a valuable and useful study.
2.
We agree that the need for strategic mobility requires maximum freedom for navigation in the foreseeable future, as discussed on pages 9 and 10. We suggest, however, that thought also be given to the more distant future when new weapons systems might to some degree alter the strategic needs for use of the oceans. For example, an Underwater Long Range Missile System would enable U.S. nuclear submarines to deploy in mid-ocean areas, thus negating some of the need for U.S. forces to operate in foreign coastal waters.
3.
Part IV, Issues and Options—beginning on page 41 of the study—presents the most practical alternatives available to the U.S. at this time. The pros and cons with respect to the general options are fairly stated. The CIA wishes to make no comment on Options Nos. 1, 4, and 5, which concern diplomatic tactics for the U.S. negotiating position at the forthcoming July─August session of the UN Law of the Sea Preparatory Committee.
4.
We consider it advisable to have additional interagency, and perhaps Presidential, review of the more venturesome Options: No. 2 on the exercise of U.S. rights, and No. 3 on the application of bilateral pressures on countries making contrary claims. In general, such measures involve a strong risk of being counterproductive. In Latin America, where feelings run high over the question of sea sovereignty and related nationalistic issues, any moves which could be interpreted as pressure in this field will tend to reinforce Latin solidarity on all Law of the Sea issues and thwart U.S. attempts to woo away the more moderate states. In the case of Peru, where specific consideration is being given to the resumption of routine U.S. military overflights of the claimed 200 mile territorial sea, a hardening of Peru’s Law of the Sea position could result.
John H. Hedley
Special Assistant for NSC Affairs
O/DDI
  1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, NSC Institutional Files (H-Files), Box H-55, SRG Meeting, Oceans Policy (NSSM 125), 7/12/71 [1 of 2]. Top Secret. John H. Hedley was a member of the Office of the Deputy Director for Intelligence.↩
  2. Hedley noted that certain options suggested in NSSM 125 might prove counterproductive and suggested considering long-range changes in technology when calculating national defense requirements.↩