Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950–1955, The Intelligence Community, 1950–1955

225. Minutes of a Meeting of the Intelligence Advisory Committee¹

IAC–M–200

Washington, June 14, 1955, 10:45 a.m.

Director of Central Intelligence
Allen W. Dulles
Presiding²

Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Lieutenant General Charles P. Cabell
Presiding²

MEMBERS PRESENT

• Mr. W. Park Armstrong, Special Assistant for Intelligence, Department of State
• Major General Robert A. Schow, acting for Assistant Chief of Staff, G–2, Department of the Army
• Rear Admiral Carl F. Espe, Director of Naval Intelligence, Department of the Navy
• Major General John A. Samford, Director of Intelligence, Headquarters, United States Air Force
• Rear Admiral Edwin T. Layton, Deputy Director for Intelligence, The Joint Staff
• Mr. Charles H. Reichardt, acting for Atomic Energy Commission Representative to the IAC
• Mr. M.W. Kuhrtz, acting for Assistant to the Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation

ALSO PRESENT

• Mr. Sherman Kent, Central Intelligence Agency
• Mr. H. Marshall Chadwell, Central Intelligence Agency
• Mr. Otto E. Guthe, Central Intelligence Agency
• Mr. Abbot E. Smith, Central Intelligence Agency
• [name not declassified], Central Intelligence Agency
• [name not declassified], Central Intelligence Agency
• [name not declassified], Central Intelligence Agency
• [name not declassified], Central Intelligence Agency
• Mr. Edward W. Proctor, Central Intelligence Agency
• [name not declassified], Central Intelligence Agency
• Mr. P.A. Trezise, Department of State
• Mr. Howard Furnas, Department of State
• Colonel J. H. Montgomery, Department of the Army
• Lieutenant Colonel W.J. Lage, Department of the Army
• Lieutenant Colonel V.J. Fenili, Department of the Army
• Captain Bruce E. Wiggin, Department of the Navy
• Mr. Lawrence Healey, Department of the Navy
• Colonel P.D. Wynne, United States Air Force
• Lieutenant Colonel Van A. Woods, Jr., United States Air Force
• Mr. John A. Power, United States Air Force
• Colonel John E. Leary, USA, The Joint Staff
• Colonel Robert Totten, USAF, The Joint Staff
• Captain Ralph Metcalf, USN, The Joint Staff

[Omitted here is discussion of agenda items 1. Approval of the minutes of the June 7, 1955 meeting, and 2. Noting of Watch Committee Report No. 253.]

3. Proposed DCID 3/6: Establishment of a Guided Missile Intelligence Committee (IAC–D–81/9, 31 May 1955)³

a. The Chairman stressed the importance to the security of the US of doing everything possible to improve intelligence on guided missiles. He stated that he would not wish to take the responsibility for not going forward with some community approach which was responsive to the need. He further stated that he realized that the suggested draft was not the only way to get at the problem and that he was more anxious to press for the principle of interagency cooperation in this field than for the details of the present proposal.

b. The Service members generally took exception in principle to the proposed draft as an invasion of the weapons field now allocated to the services under DCID 3/4.⁴ Moreover, they tended to view the key gap in the field of guided missiles intelligence as collection. This has been given a high priority by the services and it is not clear how the establishment of another committee would improve current efforts.

c. The Air Force member referred to the Air Force program to attack the problem more broadly and indicated that while collection was an important aspect of the problem, there also were possibilities in the field of research and analysis. He suggested that an alternative to setting up a new committee would be to broaden the charter of the Scientific Estimates Committee.

d. The State member stated that he would support the proposal but indicated that his department had a less direct interest in this subject than did the other members. The AEC member was in favor of the proposal. His agency has been pleased with the JAEIC approach to an important problem and he felt that the establishment of a GMIC might help AEC augment its contribution in this field. He believed that the biggest gain would be in the development of new techniques and methods for exploiting intelligence in this field. The FBI member had no objection to any proposal designed to improve the end-product but indicated his agency would not be competent to sit on the committee if formed.

e. The Chairman and General Cabell reiterated that the proposal was in no way designed to supersede individual efforts but to give them added impetus. Mr. Kent pointed out that under the present setup it is not clear who takes the action called for in agreed post-mortem findings in this field. The pulling together of all individual efforts is thus left largely undone.

f. Action: The IAC deferred action on the draft directive pending the receipt in two weeks of a report prepared by the SEC in coordination with EIC. The SEC report is to include a proposal of how the objectives of the draft DCID could be met by SEC, the changes in SEC’s charter which an assumption of this responsibility would entail, and an evaluation of current Air Force efforts in the field of guided missile intelligence.

[Omitted here is discussion of agenda item 4. The North African and Arab-Israeli Situations.]

1. Source: Central Intelligence Agency, Executive Registry Job 85–500362R, Box 2, Folder 6. Secret. The meeting was held in the Director’s Conference Room in the Administration Building in the Central Intelligence Agency.
2. Part of meeting. [Footnote in the original.]
2. Part of meeting. [Footnote in the original.]
3. Not found.
4. Document 126.