USVI Public Records

Document text

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/06/17 : CIA-RDP90-00845R000100490002-2 43 AMERICAN BAR ASS( i ee QTAN ate Volume 3, Number 12 STAT ANDING COMMITTEE Law and National INTELLIGENCE REP Morris {, Leibman. Chairman State Department Documents Soviet Disinformation and Forgeries Continued from previous issue Case Studies The Soviet Anti-TNF Modernization Campaign in Europe. The Soviet campaign in Europe against NATO TNF modernization is .a good illustration of Soviet use of ‘active measures.” After a long and un- precedented buildup of Soviet military strength in Europe, including the deployment of new SS-20 nu- clear missiles targeted on Western Europe, the NATO ministers in December 1979 decided to modernize NATO’s TNF capabilities. The Soviets immediately began an ongoing, intensive campaign to develop an environment of public opinion opposed to the NATO decision. (Of course, not all opposition to the TINF modernization decision is inspired by the Soviet Union or its “active measures” activities.) In this campaign, Soviet diplomats in European countries pressured their host governments in many ways. In one European country, the Soviet ambas- sador met privately with the Minister of Commerce to discuss the supply and price of oil sold by the Soviet Union to that country. During the discussion, the am- bassador gave the minister a copy of Leonid Brezh- nev’s Berlin speech dealing with TNF. He suggested that if the host government would oppose TNF mod- ernization, the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs might persuade the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Trade to grant more favorable oil prices. Moscow has spurred many front groups to oppose the TNF decision through well-publicized conferences and public demonstrations. To broaden the base of the anti-TNF campaign, front groups have lobbied non- Communist participants, including antinuclear groups, pacifists, environmentalists, and others. In some cases, the activities of these broad front groups have been directed by local Communist parties. Soviets have predictably devoted the greatest resources to these activities in NATO countnes where opposition to the TNF modernization decision is strongest. In the Netherlands, for example, the Communist Party of the Netherlands (CPN) has set up its own front group— Dutch Christians for Socialism. In No- vember 1980, the Dutch “Joint Committee—Stop the Neutron Bomb— Stop the Nuclear Armament Race,” which has ties to the CPN, sponsored an interna- tional forum against nuclear arms in Amsterdam. The forum succeeded in attracting support from a variety of quarters, which the CPN is exploiting in its cam- paign to prevent final parliamentary approval of the TNF decision. Continued on page 2 Conference on First Amendment, National Security Planned The ABA Committee on Law and National Security and the Center for Law and National Security of the University of Virginia Law School are presenting a conference on the First Amendment and national security. The conference will review recent court de- cisions, pending legislation, and current problems faced by those responsible for safeguarding both civil liberties and national security. The conference will be held on January 8 (keynote dinner), 9 and 10, 1982, at the Sugarbird Hotel. Water Island, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands. Efforts are being made to charter an Eastern Airlines jet to fly to St. Thomas from Washington, D.C. (BWI) at $400 round trip per person. Lawyers interested in attending should contact Mari Normyle, Administrator of the Center, at the School of Law, University of Virginia, Char- lottesville, Virginia 22901, Tel.: 804—924-5066. Spouses are welcome. Editor: William C. Mott. Associate Editor: David Martin. Standing Committee on Law and National Secuntty, ABA, 1155 East 60th Street, Chicago, III. 60637. Copyright © 1981 American Bar Association Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/06/17 : CIA-RDP90-00845R000100490002-2 —