120. Minutes of the Senior Review Group Meeting1 2
Subject:
- GEOS III
Participants:
- Chairman: Brent Scowcroft
- State: Robert Ingersoll
- Wreatham Gathright
- DOD: William Clements
- Dr. Malcolm R. Currie
- James Plummer
- JCS: Lt. Gen. William Y. Smith
- CIA: Lt. Gen. Vernon B. Walters
- Richard E. Hineman
- NASA: Dr. George M. Low
- NOAA: Dr. Robert M. White
- Dr. Jack Townsend
- NSC: Dr. David Elliott
- Michael Hornblow
Richard Hineman conducted an intelligence briefing (see attached).
General Scowcroft: I think the best way to go this morning is to have a brief explanation of the positions of the proponents of different solutions and see if we can resolve this and if not at least clarify the issues so the President can made a decision.
Mr. Clements: Our original position is unchanged. I strongly feel that the three organizations most affected should meet more often. (meaning DOD, NASA, and State). I think there has only been one meeting on this subject and that was a long time ago. If there were more meetings a lot could be accomplished rather than escalating this issue to the NSC. There really haven’t been meetings. We met once with NASA and got a good agreement.
Mr. Ingersoll: Well the NOAA is interested also.
Dr. Townsend: There has been a national geodetic satellite policy board since the early 60’s, and there have been three or four meetings on this subject.
Mr. Ingersoll: The thing that bothers me is that we (State) and NASA have common interests and there is also a need to have a national security policy in this area. The GEOS satellite was the first satellite, after the weather satellites, in which this policy issue had to be resolved. There is a need for the Space Policy Review Group to look into this.
General Scowcroft: Wasn’t this taken up in the group?
Mr. Plummer: No. We need to have a meeting.
Mr. Gathright: The issue came along before the new group was set up.
Dr. Low: The satellite was launched some time ago and we have been operating under the agreement we made with DOD.
Mr. Ingersoll: I think the military must decide the military importance of the data being withheld. But we are concerned with the political side.
[Page 3]It is well known to the scientific community that no data has been released since the satellite was launched. We are concerned about our tracking stations around the world and the maintenance of local contracts to operate these stations. If host countries begin to believe that these satellites are used for military purposes than the contracts would be in jeopardy. We have already had to close some of these tracking stations.
General Scowcroft: (to Dr. Low) George, the satellite has been up since April. Have there been any reactions either domestically or internationally?
Dr. Low: The Staff of two Congressional Committees have been told and as long as we keep them informed I see no difficulties. Internationally we are not violating any agreements we have made with the tracking stations. The question has so far not been raised internationally.
General Scowcroft: Are foreign countries aware that they won’t be receiving all the data?
Dr. Low: Yes - but there may be a small problem with the French. So far they have not raised a fuss. I would repeat the concern that I voiced in our previous memo to you that at some time the fact that we are withholding some data might become public knowledge and we cannot assess what the repercussions of that might be.
Dr. White: Isn’t it true that in the scientific community people have expressed considerable concern?
Dr. Low: I haven’t heard any of that.
Mr. Clements: I also haven’t heard any concern from the scientists. Malcom (to Dr. Currie) have you or Jim (Plummer) heard anything?
Dr. Currie: We are going to face this problem inevitably. GEOS is just a precursor to other things. SEASAT is the next one. Right now we are groping with NASA to find a way of gracefully handling this.
Mr. Clements: I think it can be done.
Dr. Low: Both DOD and us (NASA) have agreed that the GEOS arrangement we have made is not precedent setting.
[Page 4]Dr. Currie: It is possible that some other arrangement might be better. We have to look at SEASAT and decide if we want to publish an extensive and accurate model of the earth.
Dr. Low: We can live with the (GEOS III) agreement on a one time basis.
Dr. White: Our concerns go to the perceptions and the importance of a whole range of international satellites. There are many foreigners working with us on these projects. If we begin to restrict the data there could be serious problems. Other countries could wonder if they could depend on receiving weather satellite data. My agency is concerned by the precedent setting nature of the GEOS agreement. We are, of course, not in a position to judge national security concerns.
General Scowcroft: Is there any way to resolve the problem other than on a case by case basis. It is difficult to establish a policy whereby everything is unclassified.
Mr. Ingersoll: I wonder if some of the projects should be under DOD control and operation rather than NASA. There is a credibility problem when you have them mixed.
Mr. Clements: We don’t want it.
General Scowcroft: If NASA goes ahead with the GEOS agreement can we just pull the curtain in front of scientists?
Mr. Clements: That has been and is being overstated. We are in touch with the scientific community and so far there have just been no complaints either from the scientists or from NASA. Even in those countries like New Zealand which had labor governments which have now been thrown out— there was acceptance and a sense of understanding. No other country in the world with the exception of the U.S. would be so naive as to believe the military data gathered by the satellites would not be withheld.
Mr. Ingersoll: As I said before I would have no quarrel with a purely DOD operated satellite.
General Scowcroft: One alternative for the moment is to do nothing and see what happens in terms of possible repercussions from the scientific and international community.
Mr. Clements: But we have a structure where we can meet and talk.
[Page 5]Dr. Low: The agreement of last April accomplished that. As far as GEOS is concerned what we have now is real good and we have no difficulty with it. But I am concerned about the future.
Dr. White: But once you have one instance of withholding data our credibility is gone. The wait and see policy has a penalty attached to it.
General Scowcroft: We would not be trusted any more.
Dr. Currie: It will be many more months before the GEOS data is ready. It will be a long time before the parameters are known.
General Scowcroft: What you are saying is that perhaps the absence of critical comment is not of any significance.
(General Scowcroft was called out of the room)
Mr. Clements: I can guarantee you that this is a sensitive item with Congress and the public. That is the other side of the coin Bob.
Mr. Ingersoll: It hasn’t stopped those Congressional committees (Pike and Church) from releasing information.
Mr. Clements: You will get the other side of the playback if it becomes known that we are giving sensitive military information to the Soviets.
Mr. Ingersoll: Well why wasn’t this considered before.
Dr. Townsend: It was considered twice before.
Mr. Clements: And there hasn’t been any uproar yet.
(General Scowcroft returned to the meeting)
Dr. Townsend: (to Mr. Clements) Yes but those first two decisions were made not to classify data. The scientific community is becoming aware that something is wrong. They have not received any data in six months. The stage is set for possible repercussions.
Dr. Currie: How about SEASAT?
[Page 6]Dr. Townsend: There is considerable concern.
Dr. Currie: From the DOD point of view that problem is much more severe.
Mr. Ingersoll: When will it be launched?
Dr. Low: In 1978.
Dr. White: If we classify data it should be early in the cycle in order to avoid future problems.
Dr. Elliott: We are defining the problems now.
General Scowcroft: Had we previously made firm commitments with regard to the GEOS III data?
Dr. Low: Yes. The only agreement there was was with the French.
Dr. Townsend: There was one with the Germans too but it wasn’t as dramatic as the one with the French.
General Scowcroft: So if we don’t release all of the data we are not violating any commitments.
Dr. Low: Yes. We held discussions with the French but there was no firm commitment.
General Scowcroft: (to Dr. White) I take it Bob that the “do nothing” option would not be satisfactory to you.
Dr. White: True. It would cause credibility problems.
Mr. Ingersoll: I agree. It would cause credibility problems for the future. Why not transfer these satellites to DOD?
Dr. Low: SEASAT has six data collecting instruments. Only one is a problem.
Mr. Ingersoll: Well why not leave that one off?
[Page 7]Dr. Low: We can’t do it. That one instrument complements all the others. There is no easy solution for the future. That mechanism that Bill Clements talked about earlier becomes terribly important. This one (GEOS) snuck up on us. The issue was not raised until the 11th hour. In order to salvage a mess we had to go with something like this.
General Scowcroft: We are all aware of the problem. (to Mr. Clements) I am not sure there is a way to resolve this problem to everybody’s satisfaction.
Mr. Clements: Why don’t we try. We really haven’t explored all the possibilities.
General Scowcroft: I hope you are right but I don’t get that sense from this side of the table.
Mr. Clements: I haven’t participated in the earlier discussions. There are damn few precedents to go on, but if we get together we might make some progress.
Mr. Ingersoll: If we decide to release the GEOS information wouldn’t that also set a precedent.
Mr. Clements: It might.
Dr. Currie: Time is not a critical factor. Why don’t we address the SEASAT problem first and then see where GEOS falls out.
Dr. Low: And let the present agreement stand in the interim?
Mr. Clements: Yes. It is not hurting anything now.
Dr. Low: Okay.
Mr. Ingersoll: Okay and we would wait to see the reaction of the scientific community.
General Scowcroft: When would we get it?
Dr. Townsend: Probably in the fall.
General Scowcroft: So we have two or three months at the minimum.
Dr. Townsend: Yes, before we get any kind of public scientific forum.
[Page 8]Dr. Low: The only minimum danger is that there might be some inadvertent release of the information. However, we have lived with this agreement since April.
General Scowcroft: If everyone agrees let’s attack that (SEASAT) but with the understanding that we need to reach a decision on GEOS III before it becomes public.
Mr. Clements: (to Dr. Low) Do your people and the scientists feel that there is a real lack of information or is it only a matter of degree?
Dr. Low: Nobody has come to me and said there was a problem.
Dr. Townsend: The biggest problem that I am aware of is that the scientists know the satellite can get data on fine spacing. In the not too distant future it will be apparent that there is an exclusion zone and that a fair chunk of the earth’s terrain has not been taken into account.
Mr. Clements: It seems to me that there are some compromise areas and substitute solutions so that we can give them what they want.
Dr. Townsend: That is true in some cases but not all.
Mr. Clements: Is it that 100% is a problem or could we get away with 95%?
Dr. Townsend: NOAA does work with classified data but the problem is that GEOS was advertised to work the other way.
Mr. Plummer: There has been no commitment on SEASAT.
Dr. Townsend: SEASAT won’t be 10 times better but there is a factor of 2. The SEASAT specs are known to the community.
General Scowcroft: Let’s pursue this with an eye to a critical date.
Dr. Townsend: Fine, we want to schedule a session of scientists for April. Just in case this comes up then we should work toward an April deadline.
General Scowcroft: That should be reasonable. It gives us time.
Dr. Low: By mid January we should be able to forward the issue to the Space Policy Committee.