Allen W. Dulles and the CIA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE on the BATTLEFIELD an Initial Survey of Potential Implications for Deterrence, Stability, and Strategic Surprise Zachary S
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE BATTLEFIELD An Initial Survey of Potential Implications for Deterrence, Stability, and Strategic Surprise Zachary S. Davis Center for Global Security Research Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory March 2019 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE BATTLEFIELD | I ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE BATTLEFIELD An Initial Survey of Potential Implications for Deterrence, Stability, and Strategic Surprise Zachary S. Davis ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE BATTLEFIELD | III Table of Contents About the Author. VI Introduction . 1 A Realistic Appraisal of AI, Big Data, and Machine Learning . 2 Characterizing the Military Potential of AI . 4 Illustrative AI Applications at the Operational Level of War . 5 Illustrative AI Applications at the Strategic Level of War . 6 The Negative Side of Disruptive Technologies . 8 AI’s Potential Effects on Deterrence and Stability . .14 AI is Only One Piece of a Larger Puzzle. 17 Notes . .18 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ON THE BATTLEFIELD | V About the Author Zachary Davis is a senior fellow at the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and a research professor at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, where he teaches courses on counterproliferation. He has broad experience in intelligence and national-security policy and has held senior positions in the executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government. His regional focus is South Asia. Davis began his career with the Congressional Research Service at the Library of Congress and has served the State Department, Congressional committees, and the National Security Council. Davis was the group leader for proliferation networks in LLNL’s Z Program and, in 2007, senior advisor at the National Counterproliferation Center, in the office of the Director of National Intelligence. -
The Role of Allen Dulles in Us Policy Discussions on Latin America, 1953-611
THE PRAGMATIC FACE OF THE COVERT IDEALIST: THE ROLE OF ALLEN DULLES IN US POLICY DISCUSSIONS ON LATIN AMERICA, 1953-611 Assessments of the CIA’s role in Latin America during the 1950s have tended to focus predominantly on the twin case-studies of Guatemala and Cuba. Consequently, the Agency’s role – and, more broadly, that of its head Allen Dulles – has come to be seen as one obsessed with covert action and relatively unimportant in terms of policy discussions. Dulles, in fact, has been portrayed as an unwilling and disinterested participant in policy discussions. The present article will challenge those assertions by suggesting that, by examining Dulles’s role in the Eisenhower administration’s discussions on Latin America, a different picture emerges – one that paints Dulles as an active and rational participant, and which raises important questions for our understanding of the CIA’s role during the Eisenhower era. ‘In the 1950s’, writes Greg Grandin in describing the Central Intelligence Agency’s role in Guatemala in 1954, ‘the Cold War was often presented as a battle of ideas, yet CIA agents on the ground didn’t see it that way’…they insisted ‘on a strategy intended to inspire fear more than virtue.’2 Grandin’s view – along with the widely held perception among many non- specialists that the 1950s served as a form of ‘golden age’ for the CIA – has come to dominate historical, and indeed cultural, representations of the Agency’s role in the early- Cold War era. During the period when Dwight D. Eisenhower was president and Allen Dulles was the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), it is commonly held, the CIA enjoyed a position of unparalleled success in US foreign policy. -
Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J
STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES 11 Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Center for Strategic Research Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University The Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) is National Defense University’s (NDU’s) dedicated research arm. INSS includes the Center for Strategic Research, Center for Complex Operations, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, Center for Transatlantic Security Studies, and Conflict Records Research Center. The military and civilian analysts and staff who comprise INSS and its subcomponents execute their mission by conducting research and analysis, publishing, and participating in conferences, policy support, and outreach. The mission of INSS is to conduct strategic studies for the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Unified Combatant Commands in support of the academic programs at NDU and to perform outreach to other U.S. Government agencies and the broader national security community. Cover: Kathleen Bailey presents evidence of forgeries to the press corps. Credit: The Washington Times Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference By Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Institute for National Strategic Studies Strategic Perspectives, No. 11 Series Editor: Nicholas Rostow National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. June 2012 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government. -
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Case Log October 2000 - April 2002
Description of document: Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Case Log October 2000 - April 2002 Requested date: 2002 Release date: 2003 Posted date: 08-February-2021 Source of document: Information and Privacy Coordinator Central Intelligence Agency Washington, DC 20505 Fax: 703-613-3007 Filing a FOIA Records Request Online The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is a First Amendment free speech web site and is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question. GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website. 1 O ct 2000_30 April 2002 Creation Date Requester Last Name Case Subject 36802.28679 STRANEY TECHNOLOGICAL GROWTH OF INDIA; HONG KONG; CHINA AND WTO 36802.2992 CRAWFORD EIGHT DIFFERENT REQUESTS FOR REPORTS REGARDING CIA EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS 36802.43927 MONTAN EDWARD GRADY PARTIN 36802.44378 TAVAKOLI-NOURI STEPHEN FLACK GUNTHER 36810.54721 BISHOP SCIENCE OF IDENTITY FOUNDATION 36810.55028 KHEMANEY TI LEAF PRODUCTIONS, LTD. -
Gary Powers Slide
95th ERAU Prescott Aviation History Presentation THE U-2 INCIDENT: A SON'S SEARCH FOR THE Spy Pilot TRUTH Francis Gary Powers Jr. is the son of Francis Gary and Claudia “Sue” Powers. Gary holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Philosophy from California State University, Los Angeles, and a Master’s Degree in Public Administration / Certification in Non-profit Management from George Mason University (GMU), Fairfax, Virginia. He will graduate this year with his Master’s Degree in U.S. History from Adams State University, Alamosa, CO. Gary is the Founder and Chairman Emeritus of The Cold War Museum, a 501(c) (3) charity located at Vint Hill, VA 45 minutes west of Washington, DC. He founded the museum in 1996 to honor Cold War veterans, preserve Cold War history, and educate future generations about this time period. As Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee for the Cold War Theme Study he works with the National Park Service and leading Cold War experts to identify historic Cold War sites for commemorating, interpreting, and preservation. Recently, he consulted for a JOIN US AS WE HEAR FRANCIS GARY Steven Spielberg Cold War thriller, Bridge of Spies, about James Donovan who brokered the 1962 spy exchange POWERS, JR. DISCUSS SPIELBERG’S MOVIE between KGB spy Rudolph Abel and CIA U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers, Sr. BRIDGE OF SPIES, THE CONTROVERSERY THAT SURROUNDED THE U-2 INCIDENT, AND WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO BE HELD IN SOVIET Gary is the author of Letters from a Soviet Prison (2017) and Spy Pilot (2019) CAPTIVITY DURING THE COLD WAR NOV. -
The History and Politics of Defense Reviews
C O R P O R A T I O N The History and Politics of Defense Reviews Raphael S. Cohen For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2278 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-0-8330-9973-0 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2018 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface The 1993 Bottom-Up Review starts with this challenge: “Now that the Cold War is over, the questions we face in the Department of Defense are: How do we structure the armed forces of the United States for the future? How much defense is enough in the post–Cold War era?”1 Finding a satisfactory answer to these deceptively simple questions not only motivated the Bottom-Up Review but has arguably animated defense strategy for the past quarter century. -
Operation Sunrise: America's OSS, Swiss Intelligence, and the German Surrender 1945
Swiss American Historical Society Review Volume 52 Number 1 Article 3 2-2016 Operation Sunrise: America's OSS, Swiss Intelligence, and the German Surrender 1945 Stephen P. Halbrook Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/sahs_review Part of the European History Commons, and the European Languages and Societies Commons Recommended Citation Halbrook, Stephen P. (2016) "Operation Sunrise: America's OSS, Swiss Intelligence, and the German Surrender 1945," Swiss American Historical Society Review: Vol. 52 : No. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/sahs_review/vol52/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Swiss American Historical Society Review by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Halbrook: Operation Sunrise Operation Sunrise: America's OSS, Swiss Intelligence, and the German Surrender 1945 by Stephen P. Halbrook* Operation Sunrise was a cooperative effort of American and Swiss intelligence services which led to the unconditional surrender of the German Wehrmacht forces in Northern Italy and Western Austria on May 2, 1945. General Heinrich von Yietinghoff, Commander-in Chief of the Southwest Command and of Army Group C, surrendered nearly a million soldiers, the strongest remaining German force. This was the first great surrender of German forces to the Allies, and became a strong impetus for the final Allied victory over Nazi Germany on May 8, Victory in Europe (YE) Day. Operation Sunrise helped to nip in the bud Nazi aspirations for guerilla resistance in an Alpine redoubt. -
Interpreting JFK's Inaugural Address
Interpreting JFK’s Inaugural Address Topic: President Kennedy’s Inaugural Speech Grade Level: 9 - 12 Subject Area: US History Time required: 1 class period Goals/ Rationale President Kennedy’s inaugural speech addressed not only the American people, but also people throughout the world—including newly independent nations, old allies, and the Soviet Union. In this lesson plan, students are challenged to consider how the speech might have resonated with some of these audiences. Essential Question: How can a speech or public statement resonate differently with various audiences, depending upon their point of view? Objectives Students will: discuss the significance of events leading up to Kennedy’s inauguration. analyze the inaugural address from three perspectives—a young civil rights activist, a Soviet diplomat, and a Cuban exile. evaluate the speech from one of these perspectives. Connections to Curriculum (Standards) National History Standards U.S. History: Postwar United States (1945 to early 1970s), Era 9: 2A: The student understands the international origins and domestic consequences of the Cold War. 3B: The student understands the “New Frontier” and the “Great Society.” Massachusetts History and Social Science Framework USII.T5.1 - Using primary sources such as campaign literature and debates, news articles/analyses, editorials, and television coverage, analyze the important policies and events that took place during the presidencies of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Richard M. Nixon. Prior Knowledge and Skills Students should have a working knowledge of the Cold War, civil rights movement, and the major events following World War II. Students should also know how to analyze a piece of text, and draw their own conclusions. -
The Defense Establishment in Cold War Arizona, 1945–1968 Jason H
The Defense Establishment in Cold War Arizona, 1945–1968 Jason H. Gart Journal of Arizona History, Volume 60, Number 3, Autumn 2019, pp. 301-332 (Article) Published by Arizona Historical Society For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/737794 [ This content has been declared free to read by the pubisher during the COVID-19 pandemic. ] The Defense Establishment in Cold War Arizona, 1945–1968 By Jason H. Gart n February 16, 1956, Robert J. Everett, a former U.S. Air Force O pilot turned Lockheed Aircraft Corporation employee, ejected over Arizona at approximately thirty thousand feet after a fire started in his cockpit during a routine training flight.1 Ten months later, on December 19, 1956, Bob Ericson, another Lockheed Aircraft pilot, was also forced to jettison over Arizona, this time at twenty-eight thousand feet, when his interior oxygen supply became “prematurely depleted.”2 Although aircraft crashes were a frequent occurrence in Arizona during the 1950s and 1960s, these two events were par- ticularly unique. The aircraft were U-2s, and the pilots were actu- ally working for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The U-2 program, which was authorized by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in December 1954, was a clandestine CIA effort charged with high- altitude, deep-penetration reconnaissance overflights of the Soviet Union. The program’s namesake aircraft, intentionally misrepre- sented as a nondescript utility aircraft (i.e., part of the U.S. Air 1 Allen W. Dulles to Andrew J. Goodpaster, September 22, 1960, Intelligence Matters (19), Box 15, Subject Series, Alphabetical Subseries, Office of the Staff Secretary, White House Office, Dwight D. -
The 2016 Election, Russian Hackers, And
(DIS)INFORMATION WARFARE: THE 2016 ELECTION, RUSSIAN HACKERS, AND U.S. DEMOCRATIC PRECARITY by EMILY A. FOWLER A THESIS Presented to the Department of Political Science and the Robert D. Clark Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts Spring 2021 An Abstract of the Thesis of Emily Fowler for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in the Department of Political Science to be taken Spring 2021 (Dis)information Warfare: The 2016 Election, Russian Hackers, and U.S. Democratic Precarity Approved: ______Daniel Tichenor, Ph.D.__________ Primary Thesis Advisor The 2016 election of Donald J. Trump irrevocably changed the course of American democracy by revealing the malevolent soft power of disinformation warfare in the American electoral system. Russian troll accounts operated by artificial intelligence bots systematically targeted voters on behalf of Mr. Trump to alter behavior and elicit polarizing reactions, cultivating his campaign of fearmongering and racism. Voters of color in key battleground districts—which won Mr. Trump the Electoral College—were marginalized through campaigns slandering Hillary Clinton’s record with Black and Latinx voters. The 2019 special counsel report by Robert Mueller confirmed that Russian disinformation Internet trolls worked to sow discord within the American public in the 2016 election—but what does this reveal about the sustainable future of the United States’ democracy as technology continues evolving? What do these campaigns reveal about the targeted audience for foreign actors and consulting firms? Through my research, I aim to correlate the history of disinformation with the future development of artificial intelligent technologies. -
Spy Culture and the Making of the Modern Intelligence Agency: from Richard Hannay to James Bond to Drone Warfare By
Spy Culture and the Making of the Modern Intelligence Agency: From Richard Hannay to James Bond to Drone Warfare by Matthew A. Bellamy A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (English Language and Literature) in the University of Michigan 2018 Dissertation Committee: Associate Professor Susan Najita, Chair Professor Daniel Hack Professor Mika Lavaque-Manty Associate Professor Andrea Zemgulys Matthew A. Bellamy [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6914-8116 © Matthew A. Bellamy 2018 DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to all my students, from those in Jacksonville, Florida to those in Port-au-Prince, Haiti and Ann Arbor, Michigan. It is also dedicated to the friends and mentors who have been with me over the seven years of my graduate career. Especially to Charity and Charisse. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication ii List of Figures v Abstract vi Chapter 1 Introduction: Espionage as the Loss of Agency 1 Methodology; or, Why Study Spy Fiction? 3 A Brief Overview of the Entwined Histories of Espionage as a Practice and Espionage as a Cultural Product 20 Chapter Outline: Chapters 2 and 3 31 Chapter Outline: Chapters 4, 5 and 6 40 Chapter 2 The Spy Agency as a Discursive Formation, Part 1: Conspiracy, Bureaucracy and the Espionage Mindset 52 The SPECTRE of the Many-Headed HYDRA: Conspiracy and the Public’s Experience of Spy Agencies 64 Writing in the Machine: Bureaucracy and Espionage 86 Chapter 3: The Spy Agency as a Discursive Formation, Part 2: Cruelty and Technophilia -
What Role for the Cia's General Counsel
Sed Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes: The CIA’s Office of General Counsel? A. John Radsan* After 9/11, two officials at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) made decisions that led to major news. In 2002, one CIA official asked the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) to clarify how aggressive CIA interrogators could be in questioning al Qaeda operatives held overseas.1 This request led to the August 2002 memorandum, later leaked, in which John Yoo argued that an interrogator crosses the line into torture only by inflicting pain on a par with organ failure.2 Yoo further suggested that interrogators would have many defenses, justifications, and excuses if they faced possible criminal charges.3 One commentator described the advice as that of a “mob lawyer to a mafia don on how to skirt the law and stay out of prison.”4 To cool the debate about torture, the Bush administration retracted the memorandum and replaced it with another.5 The second decision was made in 2003, when another CIA official asked the Justice Department to investigate possible misconduct in the disclosure to the media of the identity of a CIA employee. The employee was Valerie Plame, a covert CIA analyst and the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson. * Associate Professor of Law, William Mitchell College of Law. The author was a Justice Department prosecutor from 1991 until 1997, and Assistant General Counsel at the Central Intelligence Agency from 2002 until 2004. He thanks Paul Kelbaugh, a veteran CIA lawyer in the Directorate of Operations, for thoughtful comments on an early draft, and Erin Sindberg Porter and Ryan Check for outstanding research assistance.