30. Memorandum for the Record1
- Meeting with Ms. Tuchman and Mr. Kimmitt on Intelligence Support in the Human Rights Field
As requested, I delivered to Tuchman and Kimmitt ORPA’s proposed schedule of analytical studies in the human rights field and examples of reporting and analyses that the Agency published in the last month.2 We then covered the following subjects:
1. As regards to ORPA’s proposed schedule on human rights-related work in progress, Tuchman stated that she hoped that two studies could be speeded up. Specifically, she asked that the study entitled Soviet Perceptions of Dissidence and the Helsinki Accord be available by the end of April and similarly that the study entitled Soviet Policy and Tactics for Belgrade also be available by the end of April.3 She explained that these issues would come up at the NATO Summit in early May and that it would be very important to have in hand these two studies in order to prepare for the discussion of the human rights issue at the NATO Summit. She also asked that the study entitled Impact of the U.S. Stand on Human Rights be made available as soon as possible.4 In discussing this proposed schedule, Tuchman also asked that I provide her [Page 94] with the names of the action officers on each study, which I agreed to do.
2. Status of PRM on Human Rights—Tuchman reported that after much discussion Brzezinski has decided that what was needed in the first instance was a joint State/CIA report updating and describing the human rights situation in each country where there is evidence of major violations. She said she hoped to get out a notification on the need for this study within the week and there would probably be a two-week deadline for completion. On the basis of the response to this requirement the NSC Staff will then draft a PRM calling for a longer range study of the policy implications and options.
3. The Effect of Congressional Legislation Requiring Public Reports from the State Department on the Status of Human Rights in Countries Receiving Military Assistance—Ms. Tuchman commented that this legislation passed in 1976 had been ill-conceived and was causing more problems than it solved. She expressed the hope that on the basis of the Administration’s performance in this field that Congress could be persuaded next year to remove this requirement.
4. In the course of the discussion it became apparent that Tuchman and Kimmitt are closely following DDO reporting on reactions to the President’s human rights policy. Tuchman specifically noted that the reporting on Eastern European reactions has been good, but that she was puzzled by the lack of reporting from Soviet sources of reactions within the Soviet Union. She asked me to look into this problem and to let her know whether sufficiently high priority was being assigned or whether there was some other explanation for the lack of such reporting. I said I would do so.
- Source: Central Intelligence Agency, National Intelligence Council, Job 80B01554R: Subject Policy Files, Box 33, Folder 11: EO/DCI/NI Chrono Jan-June, 1977. Secret. Drafted by Meyer.↩
- Not found and not further identified.↩
- “The Soviet View of the Dissident Problem Since Helsinki” and “Soviet Objectives and Tactics at the Belgrade Conference,” both dated May 1977, are in the CIA Electronic Reading Room.↩
- Document 42.↩