In response to your request of September 18, 1972 regarding the
morning brief item (Tab B) on terrorist attacks against four private
U.S. companies in Mexico, CIA has
submitted a memorandum (Tab A) assessing those incidents and others
throughout the world.
Those responsible for the violence have, at most, only loose,
occasional links with terrorist groups elsewhere and do not appear
to be involved in an international conspiracy against American
firms.
--An important exception to the above is the alliance of Arab
terrorist organizations that have conducted operations across
national borders in the Mideast and in Western Europe.
In sum, except for the Arab terrorists and anti-war groups, attacks
against U.S. business firms in the rest of the world appear to be
random events, resulting from local dissident activities. There is
no available evidence that extremist groups in Latin America, for
example, have planned to conduct coordinated operations against U.S.
businesses. We can expect to see the fedayeen organizations,
however, attempt to expand their connections with other terrorist
groups, especially in the Mideast and Western Europe. Even so, it is
unlikely, in CIA’s view, that such
contacts will result in a formal international network of terrorist
organizations.
Tab B
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
26 September 1972
MEMORANDUM No. 2073/72
Terrorism Against US Business Firms Abroad
In recent years US business firms
overseas have been frequent targets for terrorist attacks in a
number of Latin American countries. Attacks against American
firms have also occurred on occasion in the Mideast and Western
Europe. Companies such as Coca-Cola, Pan American Airways, and
IBM are used as convenient
symbols of “foreign aggression” and “imperialism” by extremists
who resort to acts of violence for a variety of reasons. The
trend toward nationalistic policies in much of the world
probably has added impetus to those who seek to victimize US companies. The proliferation of
American-owned businesses in many countries means that US firms are often easily
accessible.
In most instances the bombings of US firms, like those in Mexico earlier this month,
are the work of local dissident groups that are essentially
motivated by the internal politics of their own country. In some
cases, particularly in Western Europe, the at-tacks against
US firms are expressions of
anti-Vietnam War sentiments. The violence directed at American
business is not part of a campaign against US firms as such, but rather a
result of political conflict in which these companies are
identified with the establishment or with policies opposed by
nationalistic
[Page 5]
dissident groups. Those responsible for the violence have at
most only loose, occasional links with terrorist groups
elsewhere and do not appear to be involved in an international
conspiracy. An important exception is the alliance of Arab
terrorist organizations that have conducted operations across
national borders in the Mideast and in Western Europe.
Arab terrorist groups, buoyed by the publicity received from the
guerrilla operation at Munich during the Olympic Games, may well
attempt to step up their activities over the next several
months. If so, US firms and
official installations, particularly in Western Europe and the
Mideast, would probably come under attack. The fedayeen have
discussed such plans from time to time.
Sporadic bombings and other forms of violence carried out against
American companies are also likely in several Latin American
countries, but no coordinated plan of attack against these firms
is foreseen.
[Page 6]
LATIN AMERICA
MEXICO
The bombings of US-owned
businesses on 14-15 September were the first directed against
American companies in Mexico in recent memory. Although there
have been sporadic attacks, including bombings, against US consulates and other US Government-affiliated
installations in past years, none has been serious or part of an
organized terrorist campaign. Similarly, there is no evidence
that the recent ex-plosions are part of any broad plan. Because
they came 48 hours before Mexico’s Independence Day celebration,
they no doubt were set off by dissident elements to embarrass
President Echeverria. Terrorist incidents designed to disrupt
national holidays and celebrations and thus achieve maximum
publicity have occurred in recent years.
The bombs were exploded at the offices of IBM and Ford Motor Co. in Mexico City, Pepsi-Cola
and Coca-Cola in Morelia, and at another Coca-Cola office in
Guadalajara. With the exception of the IBM building, where two bombs damaged intricate
electronic equipment at the company’s most important computer
center in Latin America, only minor damage was reported. Mexican
public buildings have also been targets. On the night the US companies were hit, bombs
exploded at the offices of a government financial institution in
the center of Mexico City and at a nearby Mexican-owned clothing
store. On 4 September a bomb was exploded near the entrance to
the Secretariat of Finance, which is housed in the National
Palace.
No group has claimed responsibility for these bombings. Suspects
have been detained, and they may be linked to an extreme leftist
peasant-labor guerrilla group that Mexican security officials
believe was responsible for exploding a bomb at the National
Palace earlier this month, just before the President’s state of
the nation address. [1 line not
declassified]
[Page 7]
members of this group have long been planning terrorist acts
against interests of the Mexican “upper-class,” which they
consider the “exploiters.” No US
companies were singled out in their plans.
Several other guerrilla/terrorist organizations have appeared in
Mexico in the last two years. Many of them have pulled off
kidnappings and bank robberies that have created a nagging
security problem for the government. Any one of these groups or
a radical student organization could have been behind the
ex-plosions. The dissidents believe the Mexican revolution has
run out of steam and that the Mexican “establishment”
perpetuates the status quo behind a facade of representative
political democracy. US
businesses are seen not only as part and parcel of this
“establishment,” but also as representing “economic
imperialism,” and are thus a natural target for the radical
groups. Despite stepped-up efforts by Mexican security forces,
sporadic terrorist activity will probably continue.
ARGENTINA
US businesses have been frequent
targets of terrorist attacks in recent years. The most serious
incident came in June 1969 during Governor Rockefeller’s fact-finding trip
to Buenos Aires. The bombings on that occasion were professional
and well coordinated; all involved supermarkets at least
partially owned by Rockefeller financial
interests. This outburst appears to have been primarily an
expression of Argentine nationalism and was probably carried out
by an established terrorist group to gain maximum publicity.
Since 1969 there have been several incidents involving US businesses, but never on the
scale of the supermarket bombings. Leftist terrorism has been on
the upsurge, however, with the well-publicized objective of
ridding Argentina of “imperialist monopolies.” In fact, other
foreign businesses—FIAT of Italy and certain British firms—have
suffered as much as US
companies.
[Page 8]
“Anti-imperialism” has become the watchword of leftists in
general, but there is no evidence of an organized campaign
against US businesses. Some
incidents can be attributed to organized terrorist groups, but
others were staged by unorganized pro-testers who were simply
presented with a target and an opportunity. In all cases, the
attacks on US businesses were the
direct outgrowth of strictly Argentine problems and
developments. Security forces have made great strides in
containing terrorism in general and attacks against US installations, in particular.
There have been no attacks in recent weeks.
VENEZUELA
During the past decade, US
businesses and installations have frequently been targets for
Venezuela’s several active terrorist and guerrilla
organizations. The peak of this activity was reached during the
mid-60s, when leftist groups attempted to undermine Venezuela’s
democratic government. The success of the Christian Democratic
government’s “pacification” campaign since 1968 has resulted in
the assimilation of most of the dissidents into the country’s
political life. The entire Marxist left is now functioning
legally and generally eschews violence. Some die-hard
insurgents, however, are still active in small rag-tag bands,
and they at-tract some disenchanted youth.
After a long hiatus, urban terrorism and rural guerrilla activity
resumed in May and June 1972. Much of the violence was aimed at
the Caldera government, but US
government installations and private US business interests were also hit. The First
National City Bank of New York, International Telephone and
Telegraph, Mercke-Sharpe-Dohme Pharmaceuticals, the Caracas
Hilton, and the Rockefeller supermarket chain were special
targets of the terrorists. An upsurge in telephone harassment,
including anonymous bomb threats, was also reported by US businesses.
Terrorist activities have run the gamut from kidnaping and
bombings to bank robberies and petty
[Page 9]
crimes; they appear to spring as much
from domestic protests as from opposition to US influence. The attacks are
intended to bolster the morale of the terrorists in the face of
increasingly effective government counterinsurgency operations;
to raise money for terrorist causes; to embarrass the government
and create an atmosphere of political instability; and finally
to win over more moderate leftists and nationalists by striking
out at what they believe to be symbols of US economic exploitation and domination.
Venezuela has experienced an upsurge of nationalism over the last
couple of years, and much of it is directed at the US. Given this climate and the high
visibility of some $2.7 billion in US private investments in the country, it is
surprising that more attacks have not been directed against
US interests, particularly
petroleum pipelines that are extremely vulnerable to sabotage.
For the past several months the Caldera government has had to
contend with repeated student demonstrations and violence in the
major urban centers. Much of the disruption probably is directed
by leftist extremists, but US
businesses have experienced little violence.
[1 line of text not declassified] expect
terrorist activities to increase between now and the
presidential election in December 1973. An expected close
presidential race, the introduction into the campaign of
nationalistic issues, and a volatile student population could
create an atmosphere lending itself to exploitation by terrorist
groups. The Venezuelan Government is aware of the dangers, and
its security agencies have prepared contingency plans to counter
any threats that arise.
OTHER
Elsewhere in Latin America, attacks against US businesses have been
insignificant and sporadic. Those that have occurred were often
related to political or labor strife in the host country. In
late 1971, for example, sabotage at Colombia’s Barrancabermeja refinery, partially owned
by Texaco-Gulf, came during a prolonged and bitter strike at
this installation.
[Page 10]
Student demonstrations and riots have frequently caused damage to
US-owned property, but in
many cases the targets were not pre-selected but simply happened
to be in the path of march. There is no discernible pattern or
direction to such attacks, and host country businesses also
suffer.
When bombing or robberies against US firms are planned and carried out by terrorists,
the perpetrators are usually left-wing extremists who have
broken away from more orthodox Communist movements. In many
instances, the violence is part of the generational phenomenon,
with disaffected, ultranationalistic youth striking out at the
local “establishment” and its ties to “US economic imperialism.” In Uruguay the Tupamaro organization burned the General
Motors plant in 1969 around the time of Governor Rockefeller’s visit to
Montevideo. In April and May 1970, an International Harvester
warehouse and several other US-franchised firms, including a branch of First
National City Bank, Squibb Laboratories, and the distributor for
Phillip Morris cigarettes, were bombed. In most of these
in-stances, however, damage was light.
Such attacks are a means of raising morale and acquiring funds
and publicity. A raid on a US
firm or subsidiary guarantees instantaneous and international
attention while a similar act against a local business would go
almost unnoticed outside the host country.
It is worth noting that the pro-Castro terrorists in Guatemala, the most persistent of the
Hemisphere’s insurgents, have devoted little attention to US businesses. During the past
decade, however, they have assassinated three members of the
US diplomatic mission,
including an ambassador, kidnaped an-other, and attacked US Government property. Other
terrorist organizations in Latin America have also attacked
US embassies, consulates,
binational centers, and USIS
offices, while allowing substantial US private investments to go relatively
unmolested.
[Page 11]
THE MIDEAST
During the past few years fedayeen groups have carried out
several terrorist operations against US business firms in the Mideast. Other operations
aimed at US businesses have been
planned, but for various reasons have not been implemented. In
some cases disclosure of the plans to local security services
probably led to preventive measures that frustrated the
terrorist plans.
Most of the incidents that occurred involved sabotage of the oil
pipeline owned by the Arabian-American Oil Company; there have
been five instances of sabotage since early 1971, usually in
Jordan. Other incidents include the blowing up of a hijacked Pan
American 747 in Cairo in September 1970 and of a Trans World
Airlines 707 in Jordan that had been
hijacked at the same time. In November of last year, four
explosions reportedly hit the Intercontinental Hotel in Amman,
which is managed by US personnel
and at one time had some US
backing. In January 1972 facilities of the Kuwait Oil Company, which is partially US-owned, were damaged by a bomb
blast.
Other bombing attacks against US-owned oil operations in Saudi Arabia and the Persian
Gulf states were planned by the fedayeen. In 1970, for example,
the fedayeen attempted to mine a US oil tanker in Lebanon.
US officials and private
citizens in Jordan and Lebanon have been specifically cited as
tar-gets in Arab terrorist plans.
From the Arab guerrillas’ point of view, the Munich operations
against the Israeli Olympic teams was a success and encouraged
them to persist in employing terrorist tactics. The Munich
incident dramatized the Palestinian cause. It also demonstrated
the lengths to which the Arab terrorists will go. There have
been numerous reports of fedayeen terrorist plans during the
past few weeks, including one report that the Fatah’s Black
September Organization had added US embassies throughout the world to its list of
targets. Although the Black September Organization has been
responsible for most of the recent Arab terrorist activity,
including the Munich attack, rival fedayeen
[Page 12]
groups may also attempt to draw
public attention by conducting dramatic operations. Thus the
likelihood has increased that terrorist actions will be carried
out against both official and private US interests over the next several months.
WESTERN EUROPE
During May of this year, unexploded bombs were found in the Paris offices of Pan American Airways
and Trans World Airlines. These incidents were probably linked
to attacks made at the same time against official US facilities in France. In late
1971 [less than 1 line not declassified]
one anti-war group in Paris had compiled a list of American
firms and subsidiaries in preparation for a “campaign” of
unspecified nature against the firms’ alleged involvement in
Vietnam.
In Milan, Italy, a series of attacks
was carried out against US commercial enterprises on 3 June
1972. Five bombs were exploded next to buildings occupied by
American firms—the Honeywell-Italia offices in the central city,
the Honeywell plant and computer facilities on the outskirts of
Milan, a Bank of America branch office, and the IBM office. In none of the
incidents was the damage extensive. Leaflets left at the scene
indicated that the attacks were the-work of local anti-war
groups. The bombings appear to have been a one-time protest; no
other incidents have occurred since then.
Only two incidents directed against US business firms in Spain have been reported in the past
few years. In May of this year the Pan American Airways office
in Barcelona was slightly damaged during a “lightning raid” by
some 300 youths shouting anti-war slogans. In May 1970 student
marchers caused minor damage to the Sears Roebuck store in
Barcelona during demonstrations against US activities in Cambodia. In the Netherlands, only one serious attack
against a US business firm has
occurred in recent years—in May 1970 when Dutch anti-war
demonstrators fire-bombed the Honeywell building in Amsterdam.
At the same time, First National City Bank, Pan American
[Page 13]
Airways, and
several other US businesses had
the walls of their buildings painted with anti-American slogans
and received bomb threats. Bomb threats were received by several
US companies this summer, but
no explosives were found. Similar minor incidents have occurred
in West Germany during recent years.
Usually the perpetrators were leftist students or other radicals
engaged in anti-war marches or other demonstrations.
ELSEWHERE
In the
Far East and Africa there has been no evidence of
involvement by anti-American elements in organized terrorist
attacks against US business. What
little anti-US violence has
occurred has usually been directed at US official installations. Thus far it has not been within the
modus operandi of those anti-US
groups that exist in Japan and other Far East countries to use
bombs. Harassment activities occur, of course, but the violence
that accompanies these activities is generally relatively mild,
involving rock-throwing or fist-fighting. The occasional
small-scale violence that has been focused on US companies in some African
countries has apparently been spontaneous and probably vandalism
rather than the result of planning by extremist groups.
In the Soviet Union and other Communist Eastern European countries, any activity directed
against US interests would almost
automatically be government-sponsored or controlled. In the past
there have been occasional officially staged or condoned
demonstrations around US
embassies in some of these countries, but no physical attacks
against US business. One exception occurred in Yugoslavia in 1970, when small groups
of extremist students engaged in a spontaneous demonstration
against the US presence in
Southeast Asia. Yugoslavia is the only Eastern European country
that has a terrorist problem. The ustashi—remnants of World War
II Croatian fascists—have carried out attacks against Yugoslav
installations at home and abroad over the past 18 months, but
thus far have not attacked US
facilities. Since most of their financial support comes from
emigres in the US, it seems
unlikely that the ustashi would jeopardize this source of funds
by attacking US firms or official
installations.
[Page 14]
INTERNATIONAL LINKS AMONG TERRORIST
GROUPS
The bombings and other acts of violence carried out against
American firms overseas have been local phenomena rather than
part of any international conspiracy. There is no available
evidence that extremist groups in Latin America have planned to
conduct coordinated operations against US businesses. Nor does there appear to be any
close relationship between Arab terrorist organizations and
Latin American extremists who have attacked US companies in
Latin America. The sole exception is the fedayeen organizations,
which collaborate closely.
It seems likely that the fedayeen organizations, especially the
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, will attempt to
expand their present limited connections with other terrorist
groups. The main effort at expansion probably will come in the
Mideast and Western Europe and, to a much lesser degree, in
Latin America. It is unlikely, however, that these contacts will
result in a formal international network of terrorist
organizations in the foreseeable future.
